"Scientists and Doctors Demand Moratorium on 5G" - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 03:40:07 pm
content: http://www.saferemr.com/2017/09/5G-moratorium12.htmlQuoteHere locally also some people are working on this in countrys top tech university and have some experimental proof of RF effects not limited by heating and even directly detectable by some people. They are given TV time now and then to explain that it might not best idea to stuff every possible wireless gadget in ones bedroom etc.And this needs to be explained - recently I rented a nice log house in the woods for a weekend to "disconnect" and discovered wireless router by the bed of all places

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 03:42:27 pm
content: Mobile phones, radio communications, vaccines, antibiotics... Well, we humans should certainly go back to nature's ways!

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 04:18:14 pm
content: Quote from: borjam on November 15, 2017, 03:42:27 pmNature also works by electricity incl biology, but mechanisms are vastly superior to our tech and very poorly understood (some not at all). Also if we mock these mechanisms too much nature may mock back - often by surprise and in quite harsh manner. Cancer, superbugs, healthy coworkers falling severly ill after flu vaccination etc.Of course corporate transhumanists are more than happy to to stick antenna info everyones bottom since there is money in every conceivable aspect of this incl possible health consequences. Heavy tech consumer having s**tty health, 1k of allergies and eventually dying of cancer is basically dream client for global scale business. On the other hand healthy "tree people" only using technology in reasonable and calculated manner are very poor source if income. For example I'm happy using high speed optical wired Internet connection for good part of the day but after that no need to be glued to smartphone or having refigerator keep track of beer bottles. Steve Jobs limited use of tech by his children for various reasons. When using modern tech long enough these become obvious to investigative mind.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 04:24:54 pm
content: You know, it is one of those things: "I cannot see it and I dont understand it, so it must be dangerous."

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 04:27:47 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 04:18:14 pmI was kidding of course. Anyway radio transmission is not a new thing invented yesterday, and urban areas receive a lot of RF energy on frequencies such as the VHF FM band and the different TV bands. So, just mobile phones are harmful? Why isn't visible light worse, given that it has a muchhigher frequency?QuoteThanks to some religious or pseudo religious bullshit he didn't survive a cancer that could have been treated properly. He admitted his mistake but of course it was too late.

author: KG4MXV
author_rank: Newbie
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 04:41:48 pm
content: Well I would have just pulled the power for that bugger.Anyway I have heard that some one has found cameras in the rentals.So when ever I do a rental of that sort I check them out very carefully.unplug all devices in the bedroom and bathroom.If they have a wireless network I do a scan to find all devices.And if I can not identify any of them I pull the power to the router or modem.And before I leave I just plug everything back in.I know a little off topic but still kind of relevant.Cheers.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 04:58:18 pm
content: Quote from: NANDBlog on November 15, 2017, 04:24:54 pmWhat makes you think that those 180scientists and and doctorsdo not understand the subject? Also this is subject only accessible to those whowantto understand it because tech and biology are not taught together in meaningful manner.Now for more science based approach there are tons of research around incl relatively non-biased from former CCCP (little to no commercial factor).Quote from: KG4MXV on November 15, 2017, 04:41:48 pmOf course I pulled the powerIt was most ironic that I do not watch/own TV but there was one in the cabin and on this same evening there was short clip on TV about local RF research and general principles of being cautious consumer.BTW electrical part of biology is actually very interesting. Ultrasound for example. There is lots of localized charged stuff in cells. Medical ultrasound is in HF range. Is there any consideration given to fact that charged stuff being physically moved around also generates microscopic/local RF hotsports in HF range? Cannot be detected from outside therefore does not exist...Only semi-related mention was some CCCP research when they investigated very small cell groups electrical signaling patterns before/after ultrasound exposure and discovered that pattern changed to "attack/emergency mode".

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 05:07:33 pm
content: The people that tout this shit are by far not real scientists or doctors, even if they were at one point they went to the stupid an insane side.1. They are ignorent and afraid of all the wrong things2. They don't know how to do research or refuse to due to #13. They don't know how to do proper experiments: "I put this vial of sperm in a microwave to simulate a cell phone and it boiled! BE SCARED EVERYBODY, RADIO WAVES ARE BAD!"If this were true, all those IOT everything hipsters would be already be darwinezed. Unfortunatetly we have to wait for something else to darwinize them. However, natural selection will get those idiots that tout bullshit, since they are afraid of science, they are more afraid of treatments then actual disease. "It's just cancer, these herbs and rock will surely heal me."

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 05:30:52 pm
content: Quote from: borjam on November 15, 2017, 04:27:47 pmIn fact light pollution is actual issue in urban areas. Light pollution => sleep disorders in many cases. Sleep disorders => stress. Stress => cancer. Will they ever write "person died due to exposure to light at night time"? Or same with  noise. Some take it well, some not. Those taking it well will argue it is not an issue. Some can even smoke like chimneys and live to old age. Subtle long term effects with large individual variance - these take longest to regulate in meaningful manner. For example smoking in public became regulated only recently despite being known as harmful to others for very long time.

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 05:39:27 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 04:58:18 pmI know a lot of people with degrees in medicine or pharmacology who belive on homeopathy. So, nothing new.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 05:46:44 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 04:58:18 pmI dont believe anything that is coming from that part of the world. In fact, if they say something, and the source is russia, I tend to believe the opposite. You can thank Putin's fake news factory for that.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 05:47:40 pm
content: "Scientists and doctors" argued for decades that there was no need to wash their hand. It sounds like these "doctors and scientists" are just as correct. Alternatively you've stumbled on one of the many crackpot websites, and believed it.Actually, there is a another alternative: the moon is made of green cheese, and some of that is raining down on us and polluting our precious bodily fluids and causing all the problems you imagine. Go on: prove that isn't the case.Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 03:40:07 pmAnd, even if there were such effects, just what good is being away for a single week over the course of your life going to do? Apart, that is, from saving us from idiotic suppositions such as yours.

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 05:50:37 pm
content: Quote from: NANDBlog on November 15, 2017, 05:46:44 pmFWIW Russian news while being full of propaganda are not nearly as bad as American and many of EU news.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 05:51:31 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on November 15, 2017, 05:50:37 pmAre we now down to carpet bombing statements?

author: wraper
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 05:57:49 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on November 15, 2017, 05:51:31 pmFor example, anyone found mass destruction weapons in Iraq? Or showing poor oppressed Syrian rebels just a few years ago in western news? Who turned out to be IS. So no, I don't trust any news but western news unfortunately seem to be among the worst. And that Russians hacking US elections hysteria is nothing but ridiculous.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 05:59:13 pm
content: Quote from: borjam on November 15, 2017, 05:39:27 pmBut have you conducted your own research or investigated subject deeply, or justbelievealso that it does not work? There is lot of mindblowing research around what H2O is on top of chemical formula. Also there is research that sometimes cure may be actual belief itself and pill or some "tuned water" is just source of that belief. What is important here not to enforce solution that works for you on others. People differ and truth is dynamic in time domain.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 06:01:57 pm
content: Quote from: wraper on November 15, 2017, 05:57:49 pmAre you suggesting that news outlets are expected to fact check official statements from governments, when that means in depth rummaging through another nations state secrets?

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 06:05:52 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 05:59:13 pmTruth is dynamic in time domain? What does that even mean? That sounds a lot like all the post-truth nonsense going on now.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 06:10:11 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 05:59:13 pmNo, we dont need to. Official university lecture teach you that there isn't evidence. It might have been some time ago, but you know, what changed since? Nothing.Quote from: wraper on November 15, 2017, 05:50:37 pmThat's OK, I dont read those either. I also dont read the local news.I have a very few selected, verified, politically matching news site that I read.Keeps the blood pressure low.Quote from: Mr. Scram on November 15, 2017, 06:05:52 pmIt just means that russian propaganda can retroactively re-write history. Nothing new here.

author: rfeecs
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 06:21:13 pm
content: Cell phones have been around for 40 years. 802.11 WiFi has been around for 20 years.Where is the spike in brain cancer?Where is the increase in "cancer, neurological disorders, and reproductive harm?"Historic brain cancer rate in Australia:https://brain-cancer.canceraustralia.gov.au/statistics

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 06:22:04 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on November 15, 2017, 06:05:52 pmOk lets say "official truth". First burned "witches", now sometimes show on TV for amusement. First earth was flat now round. Space was uniform now curved. Asbestos was ok for consumers now forbidden. Everything soaked in formaldehyde and other crap was ok now is says "M1" on many finnish building products. Newtons laws are valid yet quantum stuff is also. Knowing math was good thing now racist.Condolences to ones trying to keep up with latest instance of "official" truth - it may even more time consuming that reading "far out" research papers instead of watching TV.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 06:36:33 pm
content: Quote from: rfeecs on November 15, 2017, 06:21:13 pmOk, lets play random stats & quotes game thenhttps://www.itu.int/net4/ITU-D/CDS/SectorMembersPortal/index.asp?Name=41110Quotehttps://www.slideshare.net/belalelhawwari/brain-tumors-rt-ctx

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 06:48:13 pm
content: Because Chernobyl. It takes 12 years to develop cancer.Also this:

author: rfeecs
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 06:56:00 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 06:36:33 pmOK, I knowSo aside from one anomalous sample, the rate of increase of brain cancer decreased after GSM was introduced.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 06:57:30 pm
content: If people here see ourselves as scientifically literate, fact based people, we shouldn't allow ourselves to get swayed by logical fallacies.Personally, I do believe that RF under some conditions may cause health problems.Probably ones having to do with oxidative stress.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 07:08:20 pm
content: Quote from: NANDBlog on November 15, 2017, 06:48:13 pmNope. Initial spike did come very fast, then stable for some time and finally main wave.Now if play more stats game, autism rate:Overall my suggestion is to have respect for scientists, doctors and people in general trying to advance human knowledge above status quo, especially in "inconvenient" areas. It is not very pleasant most of the time. Often career-ending. Some worn but true quote:Quote

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 07:39:13 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 05:59:13 pmI can point you to two people that wanted to believe homeopathy and spent a significant part of their professional life trying to demonstrate its effectiveness. They both found none, and eventually said that homeopathy does not work.Question to baffle any homeopathist: "You claim that the preparations are very potent, and the more they are diluted the more potent they become. So what is the LD50 dosage?". Edzard Ernst (born 30 January 1948) is an academic physician and researcher specializing in the study of complementary and alternative medicine. He was formerly Professor of Complementary Medicine at the University of Exeter, the first such academic position in the world. The other was Dr Susan Blackmore at the UWE.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 07:45:32 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 07:08:20 pm... and in almost all cases simply wrong.The only advantage of science is that it contains imperfect mechanisms for weeding out falsehoods.QuoteOh dear,thatold "justification" (and I use the term loosely) for "cargo cult science".

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 07:48:05 pm
content: Quote from: NANDBlog on November 15, 2017, 06:10:11 pmPrecisely.And it is also worth understanding the career trajectory of Edzard Ernst (an academic physician and researcher specializing in the study of complementary and alternative medicine. He was formerly Professor of Complementary Medicine at the University of Exeter). He studied homeopathy, amongst other things, and eventually and reluctantly came to believe that they didn't work.QuoteA very old joke: "students of Soviet history know how difficult it is to foretell the past".

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 07:59:15 pm
content: Actually, recent research has figured out that oxidative stress causes changes in the expression of two genes, Fyn and c-Cbl, which impact cell differentiation at a crucial stage of gestation.NANDblog, BTW, radiation also causes oxidative stress.. lots of it.. also the NAC (n-acetylcysteine) that I have explained about many times is radioprotective..The a simple explanation, above also may explain autism. We need to pay more attention to oxidative stress (and redox status) of the mother and unborn baby.Multiple toxicants effects on this crucial stage of cell differentiation in an unborn fetus can be blocked by simple interventions - getting more dairy, a good source of cysteine in the diet, or one which is really really simple, taking the amino acid precursor of GSH, n-acetylcysteine, basically a food, that replenishes the glutathione used up by toxic insults or radiation. Or many other things. It helps our bodies cope with a great many things.Even very loud noises cause hearing loss by a mechanism which involves oxidative stress and cell death.Also the glutathione we synthesize from its precursors in our diet is used up faster as we age by cross linking of cells in our tissue - glycation. Also our synthesis of new GSH in the liver is reduced by changes in our body as we age.Because of the Schiff reaction, basically the same chemical reaction that 'cooks' meat, we also have much more inherent inflammatory processes in collagen.Also, cells have finite limits to how many times they can divide successfully without DNA damage, the so called "Hayflick Limit". Add to this the oxidative stress caused by any of thousands of known or in many cases unknown cancer causing chemicals or radiation and you get cancers. And many other health problems of all kinds.Glutathione prevents more of them than anything else I know of.It is smart to attempt to protect cells from having to commit suicide to protect us from cancer. because that makes them divide more times than is absolutely necessary.There is no limit to the number of cell divisions enough GSH can prevent.We should also do our best to avoiding pro-oxidant substances and things like radiation (of many kinds) that have pro-oxidant effect on the body.This applies to damaging insults and chemicals and pro-oxidant stressors of all kinds, because they all add up.When a cell encounters a "free radical", if that cell does not have glutathione available to quench it at that exact instant, it has to commit suicide, apoptosis to prevent DNA damage which could lead to cancer.Cell division like glutathione is a finite resource. A "taking".All of these processes are connected.This isnt rocket science, its something we've known about for several decades and tens of thousands of research works explore it in great detail. Its long established science.Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 07:08:20 pmDeficient synthesis of glutathione underlies oxidative stress in aging and can be corrected by dietary cysteine and glycine supplementationhttp://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/94/3/847.fullPLOS Biology: Chemically Diverse Toxicants Converge on Fyn and c-Cbl to Disrupt Precursor Cell Functionhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1790953/

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 08:16:41 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on November 15, 2017, 07:45:32 pmNaturally, humans in general are not very smart or innovative but rather repeaters. There is research around that even top execs considered "brilliant" can be essentially replaced with expert systems in most cases, let alone worker bees. For actual paradigm changing innovation one must be prepared and accept to be wrong most or all of the time, out of comfort zone and under various forms of pressure from society.For example I have huge respect for (whole minus official) part of scientific community posting their ideas athttp://vixra.org

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 08:28:45 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 08:16:41 pmIndeed. And homeopathy is one of those wrong concepts.Seehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edzard_Ernstfor pointers to those that have looked hard for evidence of its effectiveness, and found there is no solid repeatable evidence.

author: Vtile
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 08:35:23 pm
content: I didn't bother to read whole topic, but IEC gives radiation exposure levels for ie. transmission lines for both electrical and magnetic fields. 100% bogus?

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 08:38:17 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on November 15, 2017, 08:28:45 pmNote that I never said that I believe that homeopathy works. It is just field for research nor better or worse than burning taxpayer money in CERN only to conclude that either universe cannot exist or we do not have a clue. I have suspicion that latter is the caseEveryone has right to conduct scientific research in field of preference and free speech on subject.Main difference that "unofficial" stuff does not get force-financed from general public resources.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 08:42:22 pm
content: Quote from: Vtile on November 15, 2017, 08:35:23 pmDoes not seem like well matured area of knowledge does it?

author: Vtile
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 08:53:44 pm
content: I haven't read on the subject much at all, but cell phone radiation were some form of taboo as a subject up here, for both sides of the millenium, you can pretty easily guess why.IEC levels I did refer are for long time exposure, what I recall. Just what you get when you sit 8 hours per day front of the wifi router 50 cm from your head like I do. I just read on the local B-grade tabloid a wifi-hack which included some form of tinfoil directional antenna type RF-mirror, did make me irk a bit, because of random beam formation.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 08:57:45 pm
content: No matter what, the world will be very different in 20 or 30 years with a very great number of those who are working today no longer working. That will make it just as cheap to just go on doing everything thats unhealthy but profitable no matter how bad it is for people because their lives will be worthless in a court of law as more and more people lose income and become unemployed. So they will never be able to sue, no lawyer would take their cases. At least that is how the laws work in most states in the US. Thats why certain kinds of businesses always locate in poorer areas. Less liability.Also, and this is even more important, now ISDS gets rid of causation entirely basically freezing laws at the instant an international investment treaty is signed, forever. After that, nomatter what happens or what is discovered, if the people want or need any change, regardless of its cause, or who is at fault, their taxpayers will have to pay for the lost expected future profits of the change in advance or go without. making most changes impossibly costly forever. If a government does anything it will have to be the mostminimally trade restrictivething possible. Nothing else is allowed. Pretty slick, huh?Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 08:16:41 pm

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 09:15:36 pm
content: Quote from: Vtile on November 15, 2017, 08:53:44 pmJust for kicks fired up old and non trusty TES-92 and on my desk here record max 1uW/m2 (all local wireless off). Now in some other room just behind concrete wall couple m away there is WiFi router. In the middle of room 2m from router record 500uW/m2. 50cm from router 5mW/m2. If needed WiFi on my desk is perfectly fine. Inverse-square law hard at work. So if possible it would make sense to move your router because probably little to no loss in actual comms but less mocking of fine mechanisms cdev is talking about.This is exactly why our local university and others conduct this research - to minimizeunnecessaryexposure until science matures (may take generations).Just like you can pick where to wear smartphone. Perhaps in shirt pocket when younger because may need to make kids someday and in jeans pockets when older because heart may become a problem but thanks, no more kidsEdit: 5cm from smartphone downloading random crap did give 500mW/m2.

author: hamster_nz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 09:23:09 pm
content: It must be a sign of me getting old, but I start to believe less and less in there being an objective truth in such matters. Even if cell phone's RF killed 1 in 100,000, does that make them bad?- How many people may have died due to a cell phone's RF?- How many people have quick access to emergency services saved?- How many people have died due to cell phone distraction while driving?- How many people are negatively impacted in their manufacture? (e.g. conflict minerals, child labour)- How many people have meaningful, gainful employment due to cell phones?- How many people will be affected by the kWHrs used by cell phones?- How many people will electrocute themselves in the bath charging their cell phone?- How many people will have a house burn down due to a crappy charger?- What about the social harm due to 24x7 facebook and bullying?- What about the police state it enables? Soon be a 'suspect' for leaving your cell phone at home when you go out...I am sure that inconvenient truths can and do disappear and for quite a while when a lot of money is involved. In the past when smoking was promoted for good health, black lung in miners was OK, radium therapy was great for removing hair, the original 7-Up & Cocacola containing psychoactive substances, asbestos, thalidomide, the ineffectiveness of antidepressants, the social harms of alcohol and gambling...So I really stand on the fence. It will be many years until we know for sure...

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 09:36:30 pm
content: Quote from: hamster_nz on November 15, 2017, 09:23:09 pmHow boringly ... rational.Another way to look at it is that, given the widespread deployment of devices and the lack of obvious health problems that can be attributed to RF, any problems must be subtle and minor.That's not to say there aren't other health issues, e.g. RSI, or broken limbs due to looking at a screen and not looking where you are going!

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 10:08:17 pm
content: yes, its a mixed bag indeed!however, lets stay thinking people and think..many of the critics of the call to step back from this willy nilly rush to monetize every square centimeter of airspace and meatspace attempt to misframe what moratoriums of various kinds are calling for, turning cries for thoughtful changes that can be reversed (trade agreements are making it impossible to reverse mistakes involving corporations) into something that looks unreasonable when in fact often all they call for is simple common sense.Are you create the impression that people calling for moratorium want to see cell phones eliminated?Its hard to say, but they arent.Thats not the case at all. They are just protesting what amounts to a market failure where corporations are trying to continuously increase their profits without any consideration for the potential decrement to peoples health and appropriateness or the important question of is there any societal benefit whatsoever from further penetration of services which are already causing a lot of problems. As the free market paradigm is all about competition, we're not allowed to ask any questions about whether anything is appropriate or even safe now - its all only about whats the most profitable, with the market deciding. But who gets any compensation for the rapid increase in electrosmog? Nobody.It would be more appropriate for them to compete by attempting to improve the quality of their services in other areas or compete on the basis of cost making them more affordable, but the freeze which trade and investment agreements give them eliminates governments ability to do anything but let them do this more and more, supplying the public less and less for any given amount of money.. We don't need 24/7 virtual reality, We don't need health insurance companies recording information on our every heartbeat, in order to decide who they cover, or government agencies listening to every single thing we say and watching every thing we do, and storing it on an exponentially growing waste of hard drives forever. thank you.if they build it, they will come.Quote from: hamster_nz on November 15, 2017, 09:23:09 pm

author: HalFET
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 10:21:00 pm
content: I do love how they think that more antennas automatically means more EM radiation though. Basically if you stuck an antenna on every house you'd be able to use a pretty low field strength, especially if you got them working together. Then again, I feel as if stress will have a far more significant effect on our expected lifespan than the current EM exposure we experience.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 10:28:33 pm
content: There are a great many more peer reviewed articles in the database.. I am just making random potshots via search terms here.. This is science, whomever says there is no science saying RF is harmful is completely misinformed.I dont want to spam us but there are hundreds of papers on this. These are just the ones at the top of a long list. If we want them, could print out a long list of URLS, to save space. Note that what I said about glutathione (i.e. GSH, etc) is clearly true.Electromagn Biol Med. 2017;36(3):295-305. doi: 10.1080/15368378.2017.1350584. Epub 2017 Aug 4.Impact of radiofrequency radiation on DNA damage and antioxidants in peripheral blood lymphocytes of humans residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations.Zothansiama1, Zosangzuali M1, Lalramdinpuii M1, Jagetia GC1.Author informationAbstractRadiofrequency radiations (RFRs) emitted by mobile phone base stations have raised concerns on its adverse impact on humans residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations. Therefore, the present study was envisaged to evaluate the effect of RFR on the DNA damage and antioxidant status in cultured human peripheral blood lymphocytes (HPBLs) of individuals residing in the vicinity of mobile phone base stations and comparing it with healthy controls. The study groups matched for various demographic data including age, gender, dietary pattern, smoking habit, alcohol consumption, duration of mobile phone use and average daily mobile phone use. The RF power density of the exposed individuals was significantly higher (p < 0.0001) when compared to the control group. The HPBLs were cultured and the DNA damage was assessed by cytokinesis blocked micronucleus (MN) assay in the binucleate lymphocytes. The analyses of data from the exposed group (n = 40), residing within a perimeter of 80 m of mobile base stations, showed significantly (p < 0.0001) higher frequency of micronuclei when compared to the control group, residing 300 m away from the mobile base station/s. The analysis of various antioxidants in the plasma of exposed individuals revealed a significant attrition in glutathione (GSH) concentration (p < 0.01), activities of catalase (CAT) (p < 0.001) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) (p < 0.001) and rise in lipid peroxidation (LOO) when compared to controls. Multiple linear regression analyses revealed a significant association among reduced GSH concentration (p < 0.05), CAT (p < 0.001) and SOD (p < 0.001) activities and elevated MN frequency (p < 0.001) and LOO (p < 0.001) with increasing RF power density.KEYWORDS:Antioxidants; genotoxicity; humans; micronucleus; power densityPMID:28777669DOI:10.1080/15368378.2017.1350584Curr Eye Res. 2007 Jan;32(1):21-5.Effects of mobile phones on oxidant/antioxidant balance in cornea and lens of rats.Balci M1, Devrim E, Durak I.Author informationAbstractPURPOSE:To investigate the effects of mobile-phone-emitted radiation on the oxidant/antioxidant balance in corneal and lens tissues and to observe any protective effects of vitamin C in this setting.METHODS:Forty female albino Wistar rats were assigned to one of four groups containing 10 rats each. One group received a standardized daily dose of mobile phone radiation for 4 weeks. The second group received this same treatment along with a daily oral dose of vitamin C (250 mg/kg). The third group received this dose of vitamin C alone, while the fourth group received standard laboratory care and served as a control. In corneal and lens tissues, malondialdehyde (MDA) levels and activities of superoxide dismutase (SOD), glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px), and catalase (CAT) were measured with spectrophotometric methods.RESULTS:In corneal tissue, MDA level and CAT activity significantly increased in the mobile phone group compared with the mobile phone plus vitamin C group and the control group (p < 0.05), whereas SOD activity was significantly decreased (p < 0.05). In the lens tissues, only the MDA level significantly increased in the mobile phone group relative to mobile phone plus vitamin C group and the control groups (p < 0.05). In lens tissue, significant differences were not found between the groups in terms of SOD, GSH-Px, or CAT (p > 0.05).CONCLUSIONS:The results of this study suggest that mobile telephone radiation leads to oxidative stress in corneal and lens tissues and that antioxidants such as vitamin C can help to prevent these effects.PMID:17364731DOI:10.1080/02713680601114948Exp Oncol. 2013 Sep;35(3):219-25.Overproduction of free radical species in embryonal cells exposed to low intensity radiofrequency radiation.Burlaka A1, Tsybulin O, Sidorik E, Lukin S, Polishuk V, Tsehmistrenko S, Yakymenko I.Author informationAbstractAIM:Long-term exposure of humans to low intensity radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) leads to a statistically significant increase in tumor incidence. Mechanisms of such the effects are unclear, but features of oxidative stress in living cells under RF-EMR exposure were previously reported. Our study aims to assess a production of initial free radical species, which lead to oxidative stress in the cell.MATERIALS AND METHODS:Embryos of Japanese quails were exposed in ovo to extremely low intensity RF-EMR of GSM 900 MHz (0.25 µW/cm2) during 158-360 h discontinuously (48 c - ON, 12 c - OFF) before and in the initial stages of development. The levels of superoxide (O2·-), nitrogen oxide (NO·), thiobarbituric acid reactive substances (TBARS), 8-oxo-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-oxo-dG) and antioxidant enzymes' activities were assessed in cells/tissues of 38-h, 5- and 10-day RF-EMR exposed and unexposed embryos.RESULTS:The exposure resulted in a significant persistent overproduction of superoxide and nitrogen oxide in embryo cells during all period of analyses. As a result, significantly increased levels of TBARS and 8-oxo-dG followed by significantly decreased levels of superoxide dismutase and catalase activities were developed in the exposed embryo cells.CONCLUSION:Exposure of developing quail embryos to extremely low intensity RF-EMR of GSM 900 MHz during at least one hundred and fifty-eight hours leads to a significant overproduction of free radicals/reactive oxygen species and oxidative damage of DNA in embryo cells. These oxidative changes may lead to pathologies up to oncogenic transformation of cells.PMID:24084462Bratisl Lek Listy. 2014;115(5):260-6.Evaluation of oxidant stress and antioxidant defense in discrete brain regions of rats exposed to 900 MHz radiation.[No authors listed]AbstractAIM:In the current study, the effects of 900 MHz radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) on levels of thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances (TBARS), total antioxidants (TA), and glutathione S-transferase (GST) activity in discrete brain regions were studied in adolescent rats.MATERIALS AND METHODS:Thirty-six male Wistar rats (6-8 weeks old) were allotted into three groups (n = 12 in each group). Control group (1) remained undisturbed in their home cage; sham group (2) was exposed to mobile phone in switch off mode for four weeks; RF-EMR-exposed group (3) was exposed to 900 MHz of RF-EMR (1 hr/day with peak power density of 146.60 µW/cm2) from an activated Global System for Mobile communication (GSM) mobile phone (kept in silent mode; no ring tone and no vibration) for four weeks. On 29th day, behavioral analysis was done. Followed by this, six animals from each group were sacrificed and biochemical parameters were studied in amygdala, hippocampus, frontal cortex, and cerebellum.RESULTS:Altered behavioral performances were found in RF-EMR-exposed rats. Additionally, elevated TBARS level was found with all brain regions studied. RF-EMR exposure significantly decreased TA in the amygdala and cerebellum but its level was not significantly changed in other brain regions. GST activity was significantly decreased in the hippocampus but, its activity was unaltered in other brain regions studied.CONCLUSION:RF-EMR exposure for a month induced oxidative stress in rat brain, but its magnitude was different in different regions studied. RF-EMR-induced oxidative stress could be one of the underlying causes for the behavioral deficits seen in rats after RF-EMR exposure (Fig. 5, Ref. 37).PMID:25174055[Indexed for MEDLINE]

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 10:57:32 pm
content: Quote from: HalFET on November 15, 2017, 10:21:00 pmWell yea but no. Actually similar is already done. Cellular repeaters in office buildings. They do blast real well. Is there any consideration where placed - no. May be directly above pregnant secretary desk or even on walls. Not to mention master blasters good for decent tower placed directly in rooftop parking lot on "human level". Often directly facing nearby windows etc. Anything goes.What might bring the change is LiFi that has potential for intrinsic locality and massive bandwidth. So you run tiny  cable into room which is nothing compared to electrical cabling and enjoy wireless from LiFi AP but its all local by nature. Large areas with conventional RF comms on the other hand would have intrinsic low field levels because inverse square law kicks in, if any consideration for placement is made.Final sanity will be probably bought by quantum teleportation where method of throwing rocks into sea will be replaced by addressed instant "non-physical" point to point comms. Eg finally starting to communicate actualinformationonly.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 11:22:20 pm
content: QuoteThere are studies now that show animal testing is bullshit. Oh no, radition hurts small animals, it must effect large creatures like humans the same way right?https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2746847/https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4594046/http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/06/08/mice.rats.studies/index.htmlhttp://www.neavs.org/research/limitationshttps://www.livescience.com/46147-animal-data-unreliable-for-humans.htmlhttp://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/how-reliable-is-animal-testing-podium-1079311.html

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 15, 2017, 11:40:11 pm
content: Please How wouldyougo about determining whats safe and what isnt?Quote from: Cyberdragon on November 15, 2017, 11:22:20 pm

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 12:04:26 am
content: Quote from: cdev on November 15, 2017, 10:08:17 pmI think you put it in a very nice way.Paraphrasing hamster_nz, it must be old age but I find harder and harder to believe in unbiased research, especially when related to highly profitable fields. That doesn't mean I deny science and its methods - I can't think of anything better to reach such ideal - but when part of the scientific community presents a dissonant voice, dissing it simply because the "proven science" says the contrary is not very fruitful for the advancement of mankind.I like the term "electrosmog", which made me think about another health issue: stress. A while ago Simon (the moderator) created a thread about how much time he had spent (and hair pulled) in trying to set up Wifi on his apartment due to RF crowding...

author: Richard Crowley
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 12:08:21 am
content: How many of those "over 180 scientists and doctors" have given up their cell phones and WiFi because of this "danger"?My money is on: zero.

author: Brumby
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 12:19:10 am
content: Quote from: NANDBlog on November 15, 2017, 06:48:13 pmThe message is clear!!!To address global warming - we need 50,000 more pirates!

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 12:33:05 am
content: Quote from: cdev on November 15, 2017, 11:40:11 pmFCC guidlineshttps://www.fcc.gov/engineering-technology/electromagnetic-compatibility-division/radio-frequency-safety/faq/rf-safety#Q11QuoteThe studies you provided are also flawed. Your first one concerened BASE STATIONS and not phones, of which base stations have way higher output than household transmitters, and also are affected by inverse square law. Your second one with rats was iffy, define "standardized dose of cellphone radiation". IE did it actually match cellphone output? What was the distance from the sorce? (inverse sqaure law) Rats are also not perfect human analogs. The third one only proved that we should keep cellphones away from bird eggs...ok...noted. (very far from a human analog). The forth one actually gives dosage data.However most people don't keep a phone right next to their head for four weeks straight, otherwise inverse square law applies again. Also, again with rats being imperfect.The only real definative proof would be using actual human tissue of couse. Sure heating effects will be mostly the same for any tissue, but other effects on cells may not be the same. Sure there will huge logistical problems with that (IE you would have to get a corpse donated to science that they could still find living tissue in) but semantics.

author: hamster_nz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 12:35:22 am
content: Quote from: Richard Crowley on November 16, 2017, 12:08:21 amI bet you a beer that addiction councilors still gamble and/or drink alcohol..and ambulance drivers still drive cars after seeing the effects of car crashes..and everybody knows smoking is bad for you!Just because we know it can be bad for us, doesn't mean we won't do it.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 12:35:37 am
content: I bet those scientists do use their cell phones in ways that recognize the danger of pressing them against the sides of their heads, (as people are supposed to) and also bet all would likely STRONGLY oppose the siting of a cellular base station right near their homes.I've been reading these kinds of papers for many decades, and I understand what they are saying about the mobile phone situation, and its not good.

author: Gregg
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 12:39:25 am
content: If the earth were truly flat, we wouldn’t need so many cell towers!(merge two snake oil threads)

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 12:44:28 am
content: Quote from: cdev on November 16, 2017, 12:35:37 amYou bet?Your proof?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 12:50:18 am
content: That's not an answer to my original question.How wouldyoudetermine what was a safe RF exposure level forhuman beings?When your determination was likely to become normal for a great many people. Like many millions or even billions of people. And base stations have to be part of it because they are invariably put near peoples homes.Quote from: Cyberdragon on November 16, 2017, 12:33:05 am

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 01:12:14 am
content: Quote from: cdev on November 16, 2017, 12:50:18 amYou didn't fully read my post did you? Or you misuderstood. I said the proper way was using actual human tissue, right in the bottom of the post.While you first one did actually use humans, they were only 80m away from the cellphone towers, so give me a percent of the population that's that close. Also, your study just said "significant association", but what's the actual statistical data, IE the actual numbers? Remeber, statistics can be bent to fit an expected outcome.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 02:22:38 am
content: Okay, here you go...I have a bunch, what kind of format would you like them?link and title?https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3753251/PLoS One. 2013; 8(: e72370.Published online 2013 Aug 26. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0072370PMCID: PMC3753251Study of Oxidative Stress in Human Lens Epithelial Cells Exposed to 1.8 GHz Radiofrequency Fieldsor text abstract.. like this?Pathophysiology. 2009 Aug;16(2-3):113-22. doi: 10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.01.003. Epub 2009 Mar 5.Epidemiological evidence for an association between use of wireless phones and tumor diseases.Hardell L1, Carlberg M, Hansson Mild K.AbstractDuring recent years there has been increasing public concern on potential cancer risks from microwave emissions from wireless phones. We evaluated the scientific evidence for long-term mobile phone use and the association with certain tumors in case-control studies, mostly from the Hardell group in Sweden and the Interphone study group. Regarding brain tumors the meta-analysis yielded for glioma odds ratio (OR)=1.0, 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.9-1.1. OR increased to 1.3, 95% CI=1.1-1.6 with 10 year latency period, with highest risk for ipsilateral exposure (same side as the tumor localisation), OR=1.9, 95% CI=1.4-2.4, lower for contralateral exposure (opposite side) OR=1.2, 95% CI=0.9-1.7. Regarding acoustic neuroma OR=1.0, 95% CI=0.8-1.1 was calculated increasing to OR=1.3, 95% CI=0.97-1.9 with 10 year latency period. For ipsilateral exposure OR=1.6, 95% CI=1.1-2.4, and for contralateral exposure OR=1.2, 95% CI=0.8-1.9 were found. Regarding meningioma no consistent pattern of an increased risk was found. Concerning age, highest risk was found in the age group <20 years at time of first use of wireless phones in the studies from the Hardell group. For salivary gland tumors, non-Hodgkin lymphoma and testicular cancer no consistent pattern of an association with use of wireless phones was found. One study on uveal melanoma yielded for probable/certain mobile phone use OR=4.2, 95% CI=1.2-14.5. One study on intratemporal facial nerve tumor was not possible to evaluate due to methodological shortcomings. In summary our review yielded a consistent pattern of an increased risk for glioma and acoustic neuroma after >10 year mobile phone use. We conclude that current standard for exposure to microwaves during mobile phone use is not safe for long-term exposure and needs to be revised.PMID:19268551DOI:10.1016/j.pathophys.2009.01.003On pubmed.gov... there are a great many..Not all find that RF causes changes, but enough do for it to be very concerning to me.We here in the US are basically living in the country most trying to deregulate everything for corporations. And reverse regulations, Globally.In this kind of context, thats not good. The days are long behind us where we led on things like this.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 02:52:40 am
content: Keep in mind that broadcast radio has been around for a little over a century now, andsome of the early stations used far more power. If there had been any huge negative health effects from it, we would've known a long time ago.Quote from: cdev on November 16, 2017, 02:22:38 amhttps://xkcd.com/882/

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 02:53:35 am
content: Believing a cell tower is harmful is powerful stuff.https://idle.slashdot.org/story/10/01/15/1516245/tower-switch-off-embarrasses-electrosensitives

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 03:02:17 am
content: I'm not talking about a radio tower some distance away, I'm talking about fairly powerful ones pressed right against peoples heads.Or other places are of concern too.. for example,https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19649291PLoS One. 2009 Jul 31;4(7):e6446. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0006446.Mobile phone radiation induces reactive oxygen species production and DNA damage in human spermatozoa in vitro.De Iuliis GN1, Newey RJ, King BV, Aitken RJ.PLoS One. 2013;8(3). doi:10.1371/annotation/9a8a0172-3850-4059-b852-72c330769c1b.AbstractBACKGROUND:In recent times there has been some controversy over the impact of electromagnetic radiation on human health. The significance of mobile phone radiation on male reproduction is a key element of this debate since several studies have suggested a relationship between mobile phone use and semen quality. The potential mechanisms involved have not been established, however, human spermatozoa are known to be particularly vulnerable to oxidative stress by virtue of the abundant availability of substrates for free radical attack and the lack of cytoplasmic space to accommodate antioxidant enzymes. Moreover, the induction of oxidative stress in these cells not only perturbs their capacity for fertilization but also contributes to sperm DNA damage. The latter has, in turn, been linked with poor fertility, an increased incidence of miscarriage and morbidity in the offspring, including childhood cancer. In light of these associations, we have analyzed the influence of RF-EMR on the cell biology of human spermatozoa in vitro.PRINCIPAL FINDINGS:Purified human spermatozoa were exposed to radio-frequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) tuned to 1.8 GHz and covering a range of specific absorption rates (SAR) from 0.4 W/kg to 27.5 W/kg. In step with increasing SAR, motility and vitality were significantly reduced after RF-EMR exposure, while the mitochondrial generation of reactive oxygen species and DNA fragmentation were significantly elevated (P<0.001). Furthermore, we also observed highly significant relationships between SAR, the oxidative DNA damage bio-marker, 8-OH-dG, and DNA fragmentation after RF-EMR exposure.CONCLUSIONS:RF-EMR in both the power density and frequency range of mobile phones enhances mitochondrial reactive oxygen species generation by human spermatozoa, decreasing the motility and vitality of these cells while stimulating DNA base adduct formation and, ultimately DNA fragmentation. These findings have clear implications for the safety of extensive mobile phone use by males of reproductive age, potentially affecting both their fertility and the health and wellbeing of their offspring.PMID:19649291PMCID:PMC2714176J Androl. 2012 May-Jun;33(3):350-6. doi: 10.2164/jandrol.111.014373. Epub 2011 Jul 28.Effects of the exposure to mobile phones on male reproduction: a review of the literature.La Vignera S1, Condorelli RA, Vicari E, D'Agata R, Calogero AE.Author informationAbstractThe use of mobile phones is now widespread. A great debate exists about the possible damage that the radiofrequency electromagnetic radiation (RF-EMR) emitted by mobile phones exerts on different organs and apparatuses. The aim of this article was to review the existing literature exploring the effects of RF-EMR on the male reproductive function in experimental animals and humans. Studies have been conducted in rats, mice, and rabbits using a similar design based upon mobile phone RF exposure for variable lengths of time. Together, the results of these studies have shown that RF-EMR decreases sperm count and motility and increases oxidative stress. In humans, 2 different experimental approaches have been followed: one has explored the effects of RF-EMR directly on spermatozoa and the other has evaluated the sperm parameters in men using or not using mobile phones. The results showed that human spermatozoa exposed to RF-EMR have decreased motility, morphometric abnormalities, and increased oxidative stress, whereas men using mobile phones have decreased sperm concentration, decreased motility (particularly rapid progressive motility), normal morphology, and decreased viability. These abnormalities seem to be directly related to the duration of mobile phone use.PMID:21799142DOI:10.2164/jandrol.111.014373

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 03:28:16 am
content: Quote from: cdev on November 16, 2017, 03:02:17 amFairly powerful? Technology is moving away ever further from powerful transmitters.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 03:36:41 am
content: Quote from: cdev on November 16, 2017, 03:02:17 amSo you went from towers back to the cellphones cause cancer bullshit...Cellphones are not that strong, not strong enough to hurt you.QuoteNo more than using a walkie talkie near your face. How many jobs require you to use one of those daily, HUH? Haven't heard those mentioned. People have been using and been exposed to transmitters that can expose you to way more than that for over a century and have had no ill effects.Enough of this...OOOHH THUNDERF00T...

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 04:04:55 am
content: I'm going to disengage from this conversation. I'm not saying anything that common sense and our own government doesn't tell us.Take a look at your cellphone's instruction manual.Here is some common sense.. keeping cell phone in trouserpocket while using hands free may spare the brain but expose the testicles to high levels of RF, especially in certain positions.BTW, the transmitter strength of your cell phone varies quite a bit as it moves around. If you have a field strength meter, that goes up high enough in frequency (some do, some don't) you can see that. They dynamically adjust transmitter power as they get better and worse signals from their base. Driving cross country Ive been able to communicate via base stations as much as 40 miles away. (using a TDMA phone, a better one than I have now for long distance. GSM sux for long distanceInsights into electromagnetic interaction mechanisms.Goodman R1, Blank M.Author informationAbstractLow frequency (< 300 Hz) electromagnetic (EM) fields induce biological changes that include effects ranging from increased enzyme reaction rates to increased transcript levels for specific genes. The induction of stress gene HSP70 expression by exposure to EM fields provides insight into how EM fields interact with cells and tissues. Insights into the mechanism(s) are also provided by examination of the interaction of EM fields with moving charges and their influence on enzyme reaction rates in cell-free systems. Biological studies with in vitro model systems have focused, in general, on the nature of the signal transduction pathways involved in response to EM fields. It is likely, however, that EM fields also interact directly with electrons in DNA to stimulate biosynthesis. Identification of an EM field-sensitive DNA sequence in the heat shock 70 (HSP70) promoter, points to the application of EM fields in two biomedical applications: cytoprotection and gene therapy. EM field induction of the stress protein hsp70 may also provide a useful biomarker for establishing a science-based safety standard for the design of cell phones and their transmission towers.Copyright 2002 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 04:26:01 am
content: Are you disengaging from the conversation, meaning we should ignore the rest of your post, or does the quoted text rescind that, as it indicates a desire to continue?

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 05:38:42 am
content: QuoteI KNEW IT!You've gone and done it now, you've revealed your secret. You're one of the guys marketing this crap aren't you.https://www.eevblog.com/forum/crowd-funded-projects/got-protection/And again you posted some sort of study with no reference to power or dosage. We've already explained a cellphone's max output is three watts, which is the same as a walkie talkie. And that 3W is maximum, not continuous.EDIT: MEAN COMMENT WARNING on linked thread. No, I won't actually microwave your balls, I'm not that evil.

author: HalFET
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 07:21:06 am
content: Quote from: Brumby on November 16, 2017, 12:19:10 amArrrrrrr, I concur!But in all seriousness, I recognise a few names on that list, and several of them are full-of-themselves types with limited relevant knowledge.

author: woody
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 08:11:58 am
content: Quote from: cdev on November 16, 2017, 12:50:18 amI would invent a small, personal device that radiates RF 24/7. I would make these devices really cheap and readily available to billions of people. I then would invent some software with addiction-inducing aspects to run on these devices, to keep people glued to them for the best part of their lives. And then I would just wait and see......I think we're all part of a big experiment

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 09:21:24 am
content: Quote from: Cyberdragon on November 16, 2017, 01:12:14 amAt least here it must be quite large. It is very popular to place arrays on top of apartment buildings, balconies etc. First indeed it was masts, chimneys but progressively they do not care. So why not stick it low and cheap & direct straight at windows.What I personally do is little survey when moving somewhere. Public transmitters better 200m+ away. Check there is no max-power WiFi maniacs behind bedroom wall etc. Myself I just do not need WiFi because running some LAN cabling even in rental/temporary place is not a problem when can handle tools. Also net service is very fast here often 1G so it would be just stupid to spoil that kind of luxury with WiFi.As for phone - rarely keep in pocket, data & WiFi & BT is always OFF when I (!) do not need it. When speaking in quiet environment use speaker. Battery lasts a week if not moreCurrently building new place - every room fitted with excessive amount of CAT7So do not rally see whatIdo miss here. 1G up/down net. Phone works just fineJust do not feel physical need to mate with it 24/7, on the contrary - begin paying attention to this because started getting severe headaches after long phone talks (with even pleasant person). It would be quite idiotic not to pay attention when body sends a sign such as this. Since often it does indeed take some kind of personal wake up call can understand technocrats aggressively opposing even discussion on the subject. It's like going into bar and saying excessive beer is bad for you, better in the morning - clicks better

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 09:35:26 am
content: Quote from: cdev on November 16, 2017, 03:02:17 amWhat is "fairly powerful?"A typical VHF FM broadcast puts out a signal in the order of a KW.A radar in a small ship (even a yacht) can be several KW.Go to a roof in an urban area, power on a spectrum analyzer and check for the most powerful signals. Which may it be?

author: cprobertson1
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 02:42:36 pm
content: Reports like the OP linked to annoy me; it really is sensationalism at it's best. It's a matter of style over substance.While a Moratorium may seem like a good idea on the face of it; the research cited by the 180 "scientists"1mentioned some papers2(which is "peer reviewed"3nonetheless). Oh, it went up to 230 scientists while the author was writing the article.It also doesn't define what "safe" is - for instance, is the chair you are sitting on considered "safe"? How about the floor? The clothes you wear? Walking? Do you know how many people die from "walking" each year? It's hardly "safe" when you look at it that way - but you'll notice there are no moratoriums on the safety of stairs which injure tens of thousands of people every year and kill a few thousand.So evenIFcellphones of 'x' frequency caused "genetic damages" , and ooh - even worse "negative impacts on general well being" - which, so far, a very, very large body of scientists have concluded it doesn't - but even if it did - it'd still be safer than standing up from a seat4; and you get all the benefits of pretty much instant access to the world's knowledge in a pocket-sized device. Also cat videos. Those are important.1which scientists? You know anybody doing any science degree can call themselves a scientist, right? Doesn't mean they know anything about the effects of RF on body tissues2- published in disreputable online journals, from what I can gather; the one paper in a reputable place was in a pre-publishing journal - meaning it was neither peer-reviewed nor published... reassuring.3...peer reviewed by a controversial anti-EM group4- based on hospital emissions caused by standing up from chairs... vs hospital admissions definitively traced back to cell phones. Most of the latter are burns from batteries by the way.55- now THERE is a good point. The lithium battery in your phone is a FAR bigger threat to your well-being than it's radiation; you know lithium ion packs can catch fire, right? I mean it doesn't take much to make them do some pretty nasty stuff... and you carry it round in your pocket all day... think aboutthat!--EDIT--I just realised my post was a bit of a pointless rant about scientific matters being portrayed by the media; for more information see "Bad Science" by Ben Goldachre - it's a much more entertaining read than my ramble is

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 03:05:34 pm
content: I believe unbiased statistically analyzed rigourously tested SCIENCE! Where is the research proving that 5G is harmful? That radio transmissions at the levels that we are being inundated with from all sources around us are harmful? What are the levels? What are the results?Some of the earlier posts seem to dismiss harm from radiation. Again, it is all a matter of AMPLITUDE and FREQUENCY.Visible light may not be harmful but try shining a laser beam in your eye. What about UV effects on the skin? Ever stick your head in a microwave? How about radioactivity which in the early 1900's was used to show people how big their feet were in their shoes? Sure all of these types of radiation can be safe when used in the appropriate setting and life-saving!So before people start panicking about 5G, where is the research showing anything about harmful effects (at the levels and frequencies that would be NORMALLY used by an individual)? Then you need to do a proof of harm by continuing to increase until you start seeing LD50 (like legal dose 50 levels). You can't just do association studies and claim that because cell phones are more popular now and cancer is more common now, that the correlation means it is a cause. It's like the Global Warming vs. Pirates graph above. You need to isolate and vary each variable ONE AT A TIME and test the outcome on CANCER rates, on cell damage, etc. Then you have to weigh the risks and benefits against society and what alternatives we have, and whether in the grand overall scheme it will actually save more lives than it takes.

author: Zero999
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 03:08:37 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on November 15, 2017, 07:59:15 pmDoubtful.It's far more likely autism rates are on the rise because medical and educational professionals are becoming more aware of it. Notice how virtually no one had autism in before the 70s? That's because it was unknown before then and wasn't widely accepted until the 80s. Before then, children with high functioning autism were deemed to be eccentric and those with the lower functioning type retarded.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autismhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epidemiology_of_autism

author: cprobertson1
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 03:14:34 pm
content: Quote from: edy on November 16, 2017, 03:05:34 pmHmmm... now there's an interesting question: how many lives would you estimate are saved simply by a lot of people having cell phones? (id est, having an easy line of communication to the emergency services)I'm aware that's a complete a non sequitur by the way - it was just a curious thought I hadI wonder if there have been any studies done on it...

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 03:14:56 pm
content: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=mobile+phoneThe above is he broadest possible search which will bring up everything in pubmed on the subject- You can then put your mouse in the window where the search terms are and a drop down should appear with popular refinements on it, that will give you choices to explore.Articles also have "related articles" links. You can save articles in your clipboard and download the citations you saved at the end of your session.

author: cprobertson1
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 04:03:07 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on November 16, 2017, 03:14:56 pmYou may wish to append/filter for metastudies on the subject; individual studies don't tell you all that much in the wider scheme of things - especially when there are a lot of confounding variables involved (which is usually the case when studying humans).One must also remember that correlation does not necessarily imply causation, nor does qualifiable/quantifiable data equate to clinical significance.Case and point, I know two people living near a granite-field. They receive about the equivalent dose of a CAT scan every year. If you compare their DNA to somebody not atop a granite field, you'll find that their DNA is a little flermed. That doesn't mean the phone that any of these people may or may not possess caused it - and it does not neccesarily equate to increased clinical risk (since your body is exceptionally good at repairing damaged DNA)

author: IanMacdonald
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 05:42:55 pm
content: The physiological effect of E-M radiation is very distance dependent, since it works to the inverse square law. A mobile phone held to your ear subjects your brain to a very significant amount of radiation, far more than a transmitter some distance away. If anything is a concern, it ought to be this.Though, I wonder if there isn't a case for householders to claim that a wayleave is needed by radio and TV stations to broadcast through their property. After all, if they would need permission to do this using sound or light, then why are radio waves exempt?To argue that it's allowed because radio waves are inaudible and invisible would imply that it's also OK to use a private road for commercial deliveries so long as no-one sees you.

author: mtdoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 06:12:08 pm
content: Quote from: Hero999 on November 16, 2017, 03:08:37 pmYes - the spike in Autism diagnosis is primarily (or possibly even entirely) due to an expansion of the criteria for diagnosis - so that in the past 20-30 years a whole range of children who would have previously been given a different diagnosis (e.g. developmental delay, mental retardation, etc) are now considered to be part of the expanded "Autism spectrum". Combine that with a much greater awareness by clinicians and you get a graph like the one presented earlier. It's fallacious thinking to presume that it represents a change in the incidence of a specific disease process.

author: rfeecs
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 06:45:36 pm
content: It's not clear that their call for a moratorium on 5G expansion makes sense. They claim that 5G will increase exposure levels:QuoteSome of the objectives of 5G are to reduce network power consumption by 90% and to increase IOT device battery life to as much as 10 years. Right now it's very pie in the sky.Just because you have more antennas and more micro cells doesn't mean more exposure. With beam forming, lower power can be used instead of broadcasting a lot of power omnidirectionally.5G at this moment is not really well defined. So what does halting expansion mean? Expansion of what exactly?Here's a nice article with video about 5G:https://spectrum.ieee.org/video/telecom/wireless/everything-you-need-to-know-about-5gInteresting most of the comments on the IEEE article are about health effects.

author: Vtile
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 10:21:35 pm
content: Not too interesting or curious that health is concern with new "everywhere" technology: radium, x-ray shoe machines, early radar accidents, lead, asbestos, PCB, DDT, bucket full of miracle medicines, PBA, microplastics... List is just too long in many ways.PS. And every one of these are failures for science society and close by groups to predict beforehand, since they did became a problem in the first place.

author: Dubbie
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 10:43:37 pm
content: So what are you proposing VTile?A complete moratorium on ALL new technology in case it turns out to have adverse side effects?

author: Vtile
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 10:45:52 pm
content: Quote from: Dubbie on November 16, 2017, 10:43:37 pmThat would be the ideal, but of course it will never happen outside of the shangri-la. .. But is there even a scientific institution (in universities) which primary field of study is the hazards of the technologies, I could bet that there isn't one in this globe.

author: Dubbie
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 10:54:58 pm
content: I think you would fit in well in Lancaster County Pennsylvania

author: Vtile
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 11:00:33 pm
content: Quote from: Dubbie on November 16, 2017, 10:54:58 pm*meh* Invent something more clever next time.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 11:32:12 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on November 16, 2017, 03:14:56 pmSo you're not disengaging from the discussion?

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 16, 2017, 11:49:35 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on November 16, 2017, 03:14:56 pmDid not take long to find this:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29098666QuoteQuote from: edy on November 16, 2017, 03:05:34 pmNowdays you just do not get attention unless having a bit aggressive approach. Steering general public with various fears is standard practice. May be even necessary when countering addictionsAs usual - truth is somewhere in the middle. Some take modified environment better than others. Some can eat mushrooms some get all funny and may even die. It all ok until those who are more sensitive are forced to something due to ignorance of others.Also from strictly tech perspective communicating using non-addressed energy transfer is no less pathetic concept than burning fossil fuels. Maybe time to move on? Take time, read some bleeding edge research - maybe lucky work on next level tech concepts among the first.

author: Red Squirrel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 17, 2017, 12:23:50 am
content: To be fair I think it is well worth to investigate the effects, as long as it's done in a non biased fashion and perhaps via multiple independent studies. Some places are doing "micro cells" where they want to put many antennas rather close to people instead of few in high towers. All that RF does add up and there will be focal points where the power is double. A cell antenna is about 45 watts. Don't know if I'd want one in super close proximity to my house without multiple independent scientific studies saying it's safe.I do know that when we used to monitor cellular, we'd shut down the transmitters when workers were in the towers.

author: Mr. Scram
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 17, 2017, 01:08:28 am
content: Quote from: Red Squirrel on November 17, 2017, 12:23:50 amMany antennas in a small area might very well be safer than a few in high towers. More antennas and a smaller coverage area means less energy required to get anywhere.Obviously you are going to get completely different exposures when you are right next to the transmitter, rather than even just 10 meters away, so turning equipment off seems sensible.

author: edy
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 17, 2017, 03:50:33 pm
content: Quote from: Mr. Scram on November 17, 2017, 01:08:28 amGood point. If you need some "minimum" power to get service, say "X" watts is sufficient, then for me to get "X" watts in my house, that tower 1 km away is broadcasting at MUCH MUCH higher power than what I am using to allow me to get "X". However, my neighbour who lives half the distance from the tower (500m) is getting 4x more radiation power (4X). The guy who lives 1/4 of the distance (250m) is getting 16x the radiation. Power falls off at square of the distance. My other two neighbours are being over-exposed because they do not need multiples of "X" power at their homes... It's overkill only because it has to be that way to cover the basic minimum at a certain distance to fill in "dead zones".Meanwhile, if 5G is proposing more numbers and closer distance towers then on AVERAGE the population should technically get LESS power radiation being transmitted overall for the blanketed area. If we had 3 towers spread out instead of 1, say located at 0m (original tower), 500m (my neighbour) and 1km (next to my house) the towers would each need to transmit at much lower power to ensure "X" watts available at each location. That sounds more logical than to over-expose everyone within the "radius" of a tower because it has to reach the periphery with some minimum needed value.It's like cooking to the edge of a steak with a blow-torch aimed at it's center rather than using even heat applied to it. In the first case, you get a completely burned center just to barely get enough heat dissipating to the edge to cook it adequately. In the second example, every bit of the steak is cooked more evenly and on AVERAGE the entire exposure is less with better taste.

author: Red Squirrel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 17, 2017, 05:21:48 pm
content: Yeah that's true, if they can put many antennas and they only need to be like 1-5 watts, then it might actually be better. An individual phone is about half a watt and can talk to the tower that is miles away so don't need much power to get distance.

author: HalFET
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 17, 2017, 05:43:25 pm
content: Quote from: Vtile on November 16, 2017, 10:45:52 pmProve penicillin is safe for humans without using it on a statistically significant population. One, two, three, go! 3 centuries later...

author: Vtile
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 18, 2017, 10:09:14 am
content: Quote from: HalFET on November 17, 2017, 05:43:25 pmWe both know that it is challenging if not impossible, especially in case of penicillin, which were one of the first 'modern' drugs. There is a good reason why the new medicines today go through long clinical test period, before they are released out in the wild.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 18, 2017, 05:05:18 pm
content: Drug industry and pricing expert Donald W. Light has written extensively on the new vs. old medicines issue and the fact is, they are just pushing new because of profitmaking, often old drugs are as good or better. Sometimes new drugs are even dangerous.Check out his web site -his findings are extraordinaryhttp://pharmamyths.net---The push for profit is making common sense and balance into endangered species.Quote from: Vtile on November 18, 2017, 10:09:14 am

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 18, 2017, 07:51:47 pm
content: Quote from: Vtile on November 18, 2017, 10:09:14 amWith one exception: vaccines do not go through FDA testing with group control / placebo. Lately I have seen propaganda about newly released vaccines for absolutely everything (even ridiculous things such as shingles). That and the constant pressure to keep prescribing the highly ineffective flu vaccine.It makes you think.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 18, 2017, 09:30:31 pm
content: Quote from: rsjsouza on November 18, 2017, 07:51:47 pmOr not.It seems this thread has accreted yet another standard conspiracy theory.While all understanding is thinking, not all thinking is understanding.

author: rsjsouza
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 18, 2017, 10:10:53 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on November 18, 2017, 09:30:31 pmIt was not a far fetch from the topic being developed. Besides, nothing I said is speculation and I was careful to leave the reader to think critically about it. You do if you want it.

author: MarkS
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: November 20, 2017, 12:34:01 am
content: I feel like I need to dust off my tinfoil hat just to view this thread!

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 20, 2017, 12:40:05 am
content: Quote from: MarkS on November 20, 2017, 12:34:01 amJust so. Make sure the tinfoil hat is properly grounded!

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 20, 2017, 12:45:14 am
content: Quote from: MarkS on November 20, 2017, 12:34:01 amOops, I left mine in the microwave.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 20, 2017, 07:54:42 pm
content: This paper is useful in understanding a key aspect of why pro-oxidant processes (in this case modulated via toxicants) are dangerous in another important context.Chemically Diverse Toxicants Converge on Fyn and c-Cbl to Disrupt Precursor Cell Functionhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1790953/Anyway, its useful to understanding perhaps some human behavior as well.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2017, 10:28:55 am
content: Quote from: NANDBlog on November 15, 2017, 06:48:13 pmWhat? Do you even know what cancer is?It's any single cell in which the replication regulation mechanism has broken, AND the telomerase production gene has been turned on, so the replicating cells don't run out of telomere fuse within 40 replications. Every day we all get cells that go haywire and start replicating, but the vast majority don't also get a telomerase switch-on, so the resulting tiny cluster of rogue cells goes senescent, stops replicating and dies before it even gets big enough to see with the naked eye.The point is, that 'replication regulation mechanism' is very deeply complicated, and far from understood. There are layers and layers of inter-cellular communication via many different channels. Some of them are electrical (nerves), some via ion transfers through tiny specialized pores in cell walls - which act as ion pumps, with or opposed to the electrical potential maintained across the fatty, electrically insulating cell wall.And everything that goes on in the vastly complicated molecular computing and construction machine that cells are, is ionic. Therefore highly sensitive to electric fields, both static and AC. Of course everyone here insisting EM couldn't possibly have any biological effect, surely knows about the field of microwave chemistry? In which reactions that don't normally occur can be made to happen (and shift reaction outcomes), by exciting reactant molecules with RF tuned to achieve specific modes of vibration of the molecules.But of course this could never happen in living cells exposed to RF. Because we all use cell phones, wifi, etc, and so it must be safe. (This reasoning is irrational btw. Just to be clear.)Here's a story.In Australia we have an amphibious animal call a platypus. They hunt for worms in the sediment at the bottom of creeks. They don't do it randomly, they go straight for the buried worms. Using exquisitely sensitive electric field detectors in their famous duck-like bills. They can actually sense the electric fields produced by a worm's nervous system.Funny thing. Apparently platypus simply won't breed in captivity. So far as I've heard, no one has any idea why.But I bet I know. 'Captivity' will mean an enclosure in a zoo. With 240VAC electrical wiring all around, fluro lights, etc, probably all with no attempt made to Faraday cage shield it all. The E fields permeating a platypus zoo living environment are probably many orders of magnitude above what they'd encounter in nature. So Mr & Ms platypus have to put up with their equivalent of someone jack hammering right next to them, 24/7. No wonder they don't breed in captivity.And another story.In Jan this year I drove from Sydney to Melbourne in one day. It was a hot sunny day, and I had the driver window open the whole day, so my right hand was in full sunlight virtually the entire day. I happen to also have a skin pigmentation loss in some areas, such as my hands. (Which btw is an auto-immune problem, Vitaligo, there's zero family history of it, and mine developed after taking some flu shots in my 30s, read what you will into that.) Anyway, I got extremely bad sunburn on the un-pigmented area of my right hand. After that healed (about 2 weeks), lo and behold, a couple of small but definite skin cancers got big enough to be visible within a few more weeks. So no, "12 years" is rubbish. It takes exactly as long as some UV photons take to smash up some DNA, scrambling just the right bits of code in just the right way to produce a runaway cell line. Then becoming perceptible depends on replication rate, visibility, symptoms, etc.One of them was susceptible to a natural cure (B17) and with that it regressed till completely gone over a couple of months. The other's growth was slowed down by it, but didn't stop. Different errors in the cell lines, different behavior. I just had that stubborn one frozen off with liquid nitrogen. Now only a healing scar.

author: tszaboo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2017, 12:39:30 pm
content: Quote from: TerraHertz on November 22, 2017, 10:28:55 amJesus Christ man, do you have your sarcasm detector off?I answered a ridiculous claim with an equally ridiculous answer.I thought the flying spagetti monster would have been a good clue.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2017, 02:47:51 pm
content: Strong RF can cause DNA repair "adducts"Single-and double-strand DNA breaks are a sign of DNA damage- "DNA adducts" which is cumulative and can be measured.

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2017, 03:45:26 pm
content: It's not the RF, that's just a cover up, it's the aliens wot done it. I seen it on the history channel.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2017, 05:26:20 pm
content: Quote from: TerraHertz on November 22, 2017, 10:28:55 amNot to mention poor sea creatures with ultrasonic comms being beaten to mush with 235dB sonars. Can see some pattern and cause here. Shall call themnewtonians, not lastly from world "newt". They have lacked resources or motivation to grow understanding that everything outside of quite narrow human  reception band is notjust information.Maybe this should be part of school education - "empathy through sensory overload" class. Swamp class with light, sound, vibration, smelly chemicals for hour or so. Then explain to vomiting students this what we do to environment and maybe should stop and think for a moment.

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2017, 06:44:58 pm
content: But we are part of nature. Anything we do is natural. Therefore we are no different to a Cuckcoo stealing another birds nest or termites destorying a family of birds tree or whatever. Life competes, some dominates, some adapts and some dies out. That's life.There are two arguments against this view.1. We are self aware and aware of how we are damaging the environment and through empathy and natural altruism we want to make the world a nicer place.2. We are worried that our current activities will screw the planet up for us as well. (Note that a large portion of the "economic wealth centres" of the world are right bang on the coast line).I find number 2 is far more common these days and it's the only one with any power or money, thus the only driving force that will get to do anything. Proponents of 1 are usually tree hugging hippies. When they drive hard enough coorporations just do things to appease them whether they have any true environmental beneficial value or not.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2017, 07:55:31 pm
content: Quote from: paulca on November 22, 2017, 06:44:58 pmSo big business forces some to turn every place they visit or live in into landfill? Or even needs? No need, so this is being handled. Consumer lured into city and tilted more towards service consumption. More money less impact. As for "treehuggers" - many high profile persons are into quite weird stuff looking from general consumer perspective. Occultism, environmentalism, spiritualism and many other -isms. One needs time and basic needs covered to become non-newtonian.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 22, 2017, 08:16:03 pm
content: Here I have the best argument I know of to not allow risky things even if the situation is totally unknown.The argument is a good one. Please read it and consider what I am saying.Big changes have occurred that I can tell nobody here is aware of,which go above national laws, which effectively make all deregulation or allowing anything, (or privatization of essential services, but thats a separate issue thats going on) permanent and effectively irreversible,even if its discovered to be dangerous, reversing it, i.e. regulating it again, will require potentially huge amounts of your taxpayers money be paid in compensation for expected lost profits. (see note below about insurance subrogation also)Lets start with ISDS.This video is long and its about a EU proposed "alternative to ISDS" which is likely as bad as ISDS. Its not a significant enough change. There is lots of discussion in it about the huge problems with ISDS. So you can see its an issue of major major concern with people who know about it. Which is lots in Europe but almost nobody in the US. That should tell you something.What is ISDS? It stands for Investor vs. State Dispute Settlement. Its a way of corporations to sue countries for something called "Indirect Expropriation". Basically, for changing a law which they claim hurts their profits.Suddenly, simply being a good government and protecting people is something countries taxpayers can be sued for!Corporations have quietly taken over and now needed changes in national laws that reduce their profits, trigger penalties, without the reasons they made those changes in laws being allowed to even be considered!Countries cannot sue corporations for violations they may make to trade agreements. Nor do human beings, natural persons or NGOS have any standings in these new supranational arbitral courts which are only about money. A one way flow of money to MNCs. People and our rights are excluded. Logic and common sense are excluded. This happened while we slept.Everything has been changed. Once anything is allowed or any rule deregulated (The one they really want to get rid of is the Precautionary Principle) a ratchet clicks, and regardless of how dangerous something turns out to be/ is, you'll need lots and lots of money to buy back yourpolicy space, because you will need to pay corporations claiming injury for "expected lost profits" well into the future, pay free money to whatever entities have suddenly gotten a property right in perpetuity to it. Regardless of what makes sense to your country's people. Even if a mine poisons their only water supply? Its possible that yes. They should have thought about that before they signed the deal. Corporations almost always win.This is what happened to Australia when they decided they needed to label cigarette packaging to tell people it was dangerous. They were sued in ISDS tribunal. They eventually won but at one point I heard that it had cost Australians 65 million dollars in legal costs. (they may have gotten that back at the end, but I'm not sure. You likely could find out on italaw.com if you dig.. Phillip Morris v. Australia. )So, this discussion should keep that in mind. I'm not talking about whether it is safe or not safe here. It doesnt matter to them. What matters is they get compensation. The risks are passed to the people least able to pay.You folks who are certain its safe, lets play a "what if" game. How would you feel if a cell phone base station went up right in front of your houseand a few months later it was determined that not only wasn't it safe, it was dangerous.Or even worse, what if it was discovered it was dangerous and a few months after that a new 5G base station went upanyway.Suddenly your house is worth much less. And thanks to the new science, its unambiguous, you are in danger. Who pays? You.You get saddled with the loss in value, not a corporation.And if your country tries to regulate, once its gone it cant be brought back. Without paying. You can bet that your life is unlikely to be valued as much as it is to you, basically it is valued by the amount your employer might lose in profits from the loss of your service.This is causing problems all around the world, but nobody is discussing it because of media capture.Here is another example, in the US natural gas export will likely soon mean huge increases in heating costs for some Americans. (The ones who live in areas where a lot of energy needs to be used to heat or cool their homes, or run their businesses)Those costs may rise so much their homes will suddenly be worth much less. People will likely freak out because their health insurance costs will also be going up a lot.But in both cases, because its deregulation, it wont be reversible! Its like corporations with their ISDS have said "Gotcha!"Even if millions of people lose their homes to foreclosure or mass scale redevelopment, for example, lose rented homes in cities because costs have risen, leading to them being declared obsolete because they are deemed too expensive to heat. Millions may not even have drivers licenses, but still have to move to the middle of nowhere.Gotcha!Even some people's spanking new homes will suddenly be worth a lot less because of that cost too. Because size matters.If people were foreign corporations, if changes occurred on a large enough scale, due to regulation, they could sue, nomatter what the reason those changes were made. But people have no such rights.Irreversible changes are occurring thatmay undermine an entire generations ability to get certain kinds of jobs. Even though they may have spent tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars for their educations they will simply be priced out of the market. Unless they move elsewhere, where they have no rights. What compensation will they be owed? Nothing.However, should any future Congress attempt to rescind the changes that allowed their jobs to be taken, foreign megacorporations would likely sue and have to be paid potentially billions or trillions of dollars in expected lost profits".Same goes with the planned exporting of patients so they can get affordable health care. If a future Congress halts that, the US government would be sued by the companies in other countries or the countries which expect to cash in on the deregulation. Forever.Look at it this way, corporations have gotten legal rights to the least regulation, but people have lost legal right to safety (unless they have contractually bought it, making somebody responsible for it.) All of this without anybody being told about it. They have also lost the ability to fix things by voting, so corporations could have insurance-like coverage they should have had to pay forby buying insurance.So, what happens to people. We don't know. What we do know is corporate interests get protected nomatter what. They get certainty.1.) Suppose it turns out that 5G causes cancer and somebody has been living next to a 5G base station for five years. They might not even know this but you can bet insurance companies will and they will raise their rates accordingly or more likely just put them on a no-coverage list. Also that fact might make it impossible for them to get a job. For them to get healthcare they will either have to pay cash upfront or travel perhaps thousands of miles for any procedure.2.) Subrogation. Some people seem to be woefully misinformed about the legal system and the difficulty of finding and paying for legal representation if one is injured by somebody else. One way a lot of people find they cannot sue nomatter what happens is, they have health insurance that basically gives any money they would make in a lawsuit to an insurance firm as 'repayment' First.This will apply just as much to any purported 5G injuries as it would to anything else that is toxic. People should be aware that lots of things will be getting worse all at the same time, not just one.This will make proving causation much more difficult too. And should somebody be made ill, suppose causation is clear, say they got some rare cancer that was likely to be caused by one of these things, even if the evidence was damning, look up "insurance subrogation"Whatever you might be able to get in court would likely go to repay your insurance company first, not you. What that means is you can't get a lawyer unless you pay $300-1200/hour upfront, out of your own pocket.Since few people could afford those costs, people wont be able to sue. Also what would they sue for? Lost wages? What if they are unemployed? Over the next few decades the world is shifting to one where most people wont work.What would they do when machines do that job, or most human done work is done over the Internet from the other side of the world? Because of deregulation not being reversible, no-matter if people are literally starving to deathreversing it wont be possible. because corporations get certainty, people don't. Everything changes.The world becomes their property, NOT peoples.That will also mean that polluting will become much more common because the cost of cleaning it up will be high compared to the cost of simply poisoning everything.The costs to people will be based on lost incomes and since the chances will be high they will be unemployed, the costs side of the equation for corporations , the cost of polluting, will be next to nothing and the risk next to nothing. Just like it was in places like Bhopal.Sick people vote, you say? Not if they will likely have to go overseas for health care. Voting in the US and most other countries is tied to both citizenship and having a place to live. Nor will they be able to vote or likely work in the countries they are living in. Many of those countries may not even be democracies.Think about this before you volunteer away something in an ambiguous unknown situation which very much could turn out to effect your health in the future.

author: TerraHertz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2017, 01:38:25 am
content: That's a good summary cdev, and I completely agree with you that ISDS is a very grave problem.But, it's subtle enough that most ordinary people won't take it seriously. Not until they and their family are really suffering due to it.I take a long view. The root problem underlying developments like ISDS, is corporate personhood, and in general the tendency of memetic organizational constructs (including systems of government) to take on lives and agendas of their own, and claw legal and military powers to themselves to achieve those agendas. Typically in total conflict with the rights and needs of natural living humans and the Earth's ecosystem.It's probably going to get a lot worse, before the underlying problem is solved. And from our present global socio-economic setup, there doesn't appear to be any potential peaceful, incremental path to a solution. I predict it's going to involve the usual 'reset method', involving catastrophic collapse of the existing non-viable structures, and a revolutionary change to something very different. Of a form that's unimaginable to most people now.At a guess, I'd think that would involve an outright ban on legal fictions that allow ownership of anything by any entity other than real physical humans. No more immortal soul-less and technically insane corporate fictions, and all the concentration of capital and power those imply. Also no more fiat fractional reserve currency creation out of nothing, by a tiny corporate clan, that effectively rule the world via their ability to conjure any amount of money into existence.Ha ha, and making lying/faking in publicly significant areas (such as scientific research and mass media) a capital offense could help a lot too. It's absurd that there is at present no legal requirement for media corporations to endeavor to be truthful. Witness the US court case a few years ago in which some reporters who were fired for refusing to lie as ordered, lost their wrongful dismissal lawsuit. Reason: their employer has no legal requirement to tell the truth. They can outright lie however much they want to.I expect under ISDS the MSM would demand to be paid (a lot) for lost corporate/swamp sponsorship if they were legally forced to tell the truth.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2017, 01:41:12 am
content: Its far more likely that telling the truth would be criminalized. It almost already is.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2017, 09:05:39 am
content: Quote from: cdev on November 23, 2017, 01:41:12 amA more serious problem is the "post truth" movement, where emotion and cherry-picking dominate, and thoughtful and carefully researched and understood facts are ridiculed."They won't listen to my truth" has long been a wail uttered by nutty kooks.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2017, 06:18:21 pm
content: TerraHertz, under ISDS the various locking ins and entitlements are owned only by foreign owned corporations. So a country's own corporations cant sue their own government unless they move to another country signatory to an trade and investment agreement, or acquire a subsidiary there, but somearediscussing that, becoming corporations officially under some other country's flag of convenience. If that can happen really, its just a appalling state of affairs as depending on what the laws in that other country are, a lot could change.Wages for their workers perhaps might fall in the original country, they might get the ability to do an end run around wage laws under some conditions. I have no idea. Foreign corporations get to change or evade a lot of laws it seems.The worst thing though is the standstill/rollback/ratchet which is supposed to be for other countries investors..but really is a way to steal the power of the vote, for good. Invisibly. This below shows how the right to regulate is being undermined, against the public interest, thetwo actual documentsthat caused both the biggest financial disaster in many decades cost many many people their life savings or homes, (bottom) and the unnecessary suffering even deaths of a lot of people going back 20 yrs, and it hasnt stopped yet) on the top, the figure- the difference in deaths ("excess deaths amenable to improved access to health care") if we compared the US to Australia or France or similar countries with functioning HC systems.. this shows the real cause behind these two huge problems was/is the same WTO-GATS agreement. Public Citizen (citizen.org ) is the only US NGO that has covered this. They and PolicyAlternatives.ca (under trade and investment research project) are good sources of info. Also, bilaterals.org , tni.org, corporateeurope.org Alsomust seethis:http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.405.5725&rep=rep1&type=pdfwhich describes the core situation very concisely -also applies to many other (services) areas. The other side of GATS which is not discussed is a huge global scheme to trade jobs across borders to increase profits but also lower wages in services- which some have compared to indentured servitude or slavery - which is called "Mode Four". It will also lower standards in professions and turn many good jobs into precarious work.https://web.archive.org/web/20080313195303/http://www.afsc.org/trade-matters/issues/LaborMobility.pdf- Additionally it basically attempts to privatize everything which will make healthcare and education and even water unaffordable to many. Privatized water is particularly scary, now in many areas its delivered via pre-pay meters in peoples homes where if they cant pay in advance they don't get water.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2017, 09:21:42 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on November 23, 2017, 09:05:39 amCould not agree more, no matter how much careful well meant research is published - if the conclusions are against profit it will never be enough proof. Various malicious "post truth" moves will be applied to ridicule, undermine and derail. But experimental facts are nasty things, keep poking their nose out here and there until something flips and boom there is paradigm change. Paradigm changes are messy and not welcome by many - just think the damage Tesla did to many well established DC businesses with his safer AC system.

author: mtdoc
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: November 23, 2017, 09:34:27 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on November 23, 2017, 01:41:12 amNot almost, it is - at least when it poses a threat to state or corporate power. Snowden, Manning, and Assange can attest to that.Quote from: tggzzz on November 23, 2017, 09:05:39 amYep. That too!

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 02, 2018, 12:41:28 pm
content: Quote from: TerraHertz on November 22, 2017, 10:28:55 amIs it the only one animal that relies on electrical signals?I am an amateur radio operator and I do have a marine aquarium. Have you ever heard of the lateral line in fishes? Have you heard of the knifefishes that live perfectly fine in aquariums surrounded by elecrical equipment? (pumps, filters, etc).

author: donotdespisethesnake
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2018, 01:36:21 pm
content: Humans will fuck everything up, it is just of question of what method and how long it takes. It's inevitable that we introduce technology before having any real idea of what the impacts are. Before the first fusion bomb was tested, there was a serious concern that it could initiate fusion of nitrogen atoms in the atmosphere and literally blow up the atmosphere. It was Edward Teller of that atomic bomb program that warned the fossil fuel industry about the dangers of global warming, back in 1959.I think this is the answer to the Fermi paradox. A stable global ecosystem which is capable of producing a species with advanced intelligence is unable to survive the destabilizing effect of advanced intelligence.

author: IanMacdonald
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2018, 02:00:55 pm
content: "Humans will fuck everything up"Humans seem to be doing quite well just now. I mean, we arewayoutdone by spiders, of which there are far greater numbers. However the present numbers are certainly evolution-worthy, as is the fact that a high proportion are healthy individuals with a good life expectancy.This contrasts strongly with the pre-industrial era, when the number of humans was much smaller, and due to infant mortality a large part of the female's lifespan was taken up with raising enough young to ensure survival of at least two on average. Most females lost their lives due to childbirth complications rather than living to full term. Meanwhile the male was generally involved either in backbreaking manual work or else defending the territory against invaders, either of which activities led to an even shorter life expectancy than for the female.So, I think we've done pretty well so far with industrialisation. The female only need risk her life two or three times to ensure survival of the species, and the male gets to use machinery to do the heavy grunt or the dangerous jobs, like defending the territory against bad guys. It may not be perfect, but do we want to go back to what we had before?HELL, NO!!!!

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2018, 02:19:44 pm
content: What should we do when people just plain aren't "needed" to do those things any more, or when there are so many more people than jobs that the jobs will invariably pay much less than it costs to live in most civilized places?(There is likely a limit to how long people will work for free for "work experience", and currently, at least, you can't legally run a real business on interns alone, unless its an NGO.)Here's a thought. Many small devices, for example, surveillance devices, will likely be able to run off of RF in their immediate vicinity. IF there is enough of it, everywhere.Then we can have an Internet of NOSY things.Quote from: IanMacdonald on January 03, 2018, 02:00:55 pmWhat about going back to what we had before, but without the cottage industry and subsistence agriculture?(those things can be automated)

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2018, 02:35:11 pm
content: Quote from: donotdespisethesnake on January 03, 2018, 01:36:21 pmI think you must certainly be right there about this time being exceedingly dangerous in the development of our species. I think this is sort of our adolescence, the difficult teens, when we have more power to hurt ourselves than wisdom to prevent it.Likely only a small portion of intelligent species make it through these years without disaster. I think that if we do, we will be lucky if we last it through this century. At that point we will be either capable of handling the gifts technology has given us or we will have destroyed ourselves and the planet with us, or be so close to having done so (the earth left so damaged) that that outcome is inevitable.Luckily time is the great healer so even if we destroy ourselves and most life on the planet some will likely survive, way down in he ground somewhere, even if they are just bacteria or single celled organisms much changed from mutation, to emerge in a few thousand years when the surface of the Earth is livable again, and then lo and behold in another four or five billion years some new "intelligent" life will have arisen to make the same mistakes again.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2018, 02:40:30 pm
content: Quote from: mtdoc on November 23, 2017, 09:34:27 pmThere are entire countries like that now (at least two that I know of) and people adapt by convincing themselves an entire cosmology of untrue things are true. They do it for self-preservation.In one they waste a great deal of their educations studying such things in minute detail, so much so that they have practically no free time. (Which is I think the real goal of their government, wasting all that time and energy.)When they get out and find themselves in their twin country that lacks such a strange situation, they have to enter a special immersion program that gives them a crash course in how things really are, and then they typically remain on public assistance for several years while they sort everything out. But eventually many of them do fine, especially the younger ones..

author: BU508A
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 03, 2018, 02:46:40 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on November 23, 2017, 09:05:39 amSource:https://twitter.com/PhilosophyMttrs/status/947580703763558400

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2018, 02:40:03 am
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on November 15, 2017, 06:36:33 pmhttp://tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 04, 2018, 08:49:46 am
content: Better to kill doctors and burn hospitals to the ground.Everyone knows that the better the healthcare services, the higher the prevalence of heart disease and cancer.

author: Halcyon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 04, 2018, 10:42:45 am
content: Quote from: NANDBlog on November 15, 2017, 04:24:54 pmThis is the primary reason why Australia (the third largest producer of Uranium in the world) has a law banning nuclear power plants. However the rusty cogs in the brains of some people have slowly started turning, perhaps we'll see it by the year 2060.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2018, 02:06:36 pm
content: Quote from: Halcyon on January 04, 2018, 10:42:45 amAnd why Germany is phasing our nuclear. (And since it’s impossible to make up the energy shortfall with renewables in the short term, the shortfall will be made up with dirty brown coal, at least for a while.)If it were up to me, we’d build a bunch more nuclear plants (to the highest standards, and with zero compromises on maintenance) at Chernobyl and other already-polluted places (ok, not at Fukushima) so we can phase out fossil fuels ASAP.

author: RoGeorge
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2018, 04:43:57 pm
content: "Conpumtionof margarine" is written twice in the last pic, but I couldn't find "conpumption" in the dictionary. Yet, "conpumtion" appears in many texts indexed by Google.Is "conpumption" a legit English word, or is it just a frequent typo for "consumption"?

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2018, 05:57:22 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on January 04, 2018, 04:43:57 pmThat graph is a joke probably thrown together in five minutes or less, and they didn't bother checking spelling.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 04, 2018, 06:37:53 pm
content: Quote from: RoGeorge on January 04, 2018, 04:43:57 pmIt’s just a boring old typo. I certainly wouldn’t call it frequent. Neither here nor there to the topic at hand.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 05, 2018, 12:55:48 am
content: Quote from: borjam on November 15, 2017, 05:39:27 pmIntelligence and belief seem to have surprisingly little interaction. I've known some otherwise very intelligent people who also held what I consider to be rather bizarre beliefs. Beliefs are built on emotion rather than rational thought so it's impossible to use rational thought in a debate around belief.

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 03:05:58 pm
content: Couple of interesting takes on population:(about 14:00) in he presents two lists; things the encourage population growth, things that discourage population growth. He points out that if we don't pick from the discourage list (which has some horrid things on it), then nature will.My vote is on world war. Probably started by the USA.There is also the HIGHLY controversial suggestion that in overly densely populated colonies of rats, homosexuality rate increases rapidly.And this from the United nations population division, where they tell us "Don't panic" and suggest it will top out at 10 billion or so.Anyone buying this?

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 03:39:34 pm
content: I guess I'm late to the party - what does population have to do with any potential/speculated dangers of 5G?Hans Rosling is a gem. Highly recommended.A quick skim over the posts shows the thread has gone as sort of expected - those who go in believing that there may be a danger, and others coming from a standpoint that all non-ionizing radiation is completely safe and does zero harm. Also the C-word thrown about for emotive effect (by both sides). I like to think I'm 'neutral' but of course, there is no such thing, we all have our biases and assumptions.Just because a large number of "Scientists" talk openly about fears of EM (specifically radio and microwave) radiation and potential "negative health effects" doesn't really mean much without knowing who these Scientists are, their field, their qualifications, and their background. But similarly, just because we all live in a sea of man-made radio and microwaves, without all "dropping over" doesn't mean that there aren't any mild long term effects (be they negative, neutral or even positive). It just shows that any long term effects that exist must be subtle, or perhaps masked by other things like diet/lifestyle.Also, once one starts to think in terms of secondary and tertiary effects, it becomes even more difficult to prove any causal links, but also much easier to speculate about them. For example, I could kick out some wild speculation about how areas of greater EM "pollution" cause an increase in headaches, which increases the consumption of paracetamol, which causes a small uptick in liver disease, that could only be found if one looks for it. - there are a hell of a lot of assumptions there, especially just saying 'EM causes headaches' without any kind of proof, but it is also rather difficult to completely disprove.And that is why there will always be fears around any kind of "radiation" regardless of peoples education, "class" and even by those who study in that field. Those on the other side who immediately call "woo" on it (as tempted as I am to do), are only serving to re-enforce the fears by patronizing and immediately dismissing peoples fears - that's why we live in this so-called 'post-truth' era. It's all well and good being smug, and claiming you are 'more educated' but in fact its that attitude that is harming science and education.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 04:02:19 pm
content: Germany had to stop using nuclear power generation because of Chernobyl having already made livestock raised in certain parts of Germany dangerous to eat. One more accident would mean a really impossible situation would exist for them there. Since land can't be replaced and the half life of certain radioisotopes is very long, also, as the radiation around Chernobyl is not decaying as the model predicts it should,(Seehttps://www.wired.com/2009/12/chernobyl-soil/)they really didn't have any choice.Quote from: tooki on January 04, 2018, 02:06:36 pmFukushima has created a similar situation. Its not safe to live there. Its not safe to eat meat from animals raised there, and its still not clear when or if it will be, within our lifetimes, or not.Its easy for people to pontificate about things from far away but if you had had a home there and your life was now pretty much ruined, your home unoccupied, in the exclusion zone, with no compensation, (the fine print in insurance policies excludes risks from radiation, toxic chemicals, acts of war, etc.) how would you feel?

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 04:28:05 pm
content: I live in a place close enough to a nuclear reactor that the Swiss government distributes iodine tablets to keep on hand just in case.Besides, Chernobyl happened because of incredibly poor operation of a non-fail-safe design. And moreover,it's not why Germans decided to get rid of nuclear power. They did it because they don't want to deal with nuclear waste. (I've had many an argument with rabidly anti-nuclear Germans…)So yeah, sorry, but I remain unmoved.

author: Gromitt
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 06:17:17 pm
content: Quote from: Buriedcode on January 06, 2018, 03:39:34 pmHe was a gem.Regrettably he died in February 2017.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Rosling

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 06:24:35 pm
content: Its my understanding that all boiling water reactors have a very significant safety weakness when it comes to loss of power for cooling both the reactor cores and spent fuel storage - which is described technically as "loss of the ultimate heat sink".Which is what occurred at the Fukushima Daiichi I power plant's reactors 1,2 and 3.Authoritative analyses of what happened at Fukushima:http://fukushima.ans.org/report/accident-analysishttps://www.nap.edu/read/21874/chapter/5http://www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/safety-and-security/safety-of-plants/fukushima-accident.aspxhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fukushima_Daiichi_nuclear_disaster_(Unit_1_Reactor)http://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/AdditionalVolumes/P1710/Pub1710-TV1-Web.pdfAdditionally, the mechanics of post-accident radiation level science remain largely unknown, as shown by the persistent levels of very high radiation at both Chernobyl and Fukushima.https://www.wired.com/2009/12/chernobyl-soil/citing "Long-Term Dynamics of Radionuclides Vertical Migration in Soils of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant Exclusion Zone" by Yu.A. Ivanov, V.A. Kashparov, S.E. Levchuk, Yu.V. Khomutinin, M.D. Bondarkov, A.M. Maximenko, E.B. Farfan, G.T. Jannik, and J.C. Marra. AGU 2009 poster session.alsoRadiation Level at Fukushima Dwarfs the Highest Peak at Chernobyl (2017)http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2017/02/03/national/fukushima-radiation-level-highest-since-march-11/https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/feb/03/fukushima-daiichi-radiation-levels-highest-since-2011-meltdownhttps://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/28302792729.pdf(see maps re: Switzerland deposition of radioisotopes due to rainfall)Quote from: tooki on January 06, 2018, 04:28:05 pmTooki,Your government may know something you don't. Listen to them.Don't just brush off the danger presented by radiation. It appears that Switzerland, because of its mountains, catches a lot of radiation from the clouds, because of the rain that falls there.

author: james_s
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 06:27:54 pm
content: Quote from: tooki on January 06, 2018, 04:28:05 pmIronically the anti-nuke lobby has had the unintended side effect of keeping large numbers of aging Fukushima-era nuclear plants operating beyond their design life by preventing the construction of newer, much safer and much more efficient nuclear plants that are both less likely to suffer an accident and produce less waste by using less fuel.Now I'm not rabidly pro or anti nuclear, I recognize that it is not without risks but neither is any other form of energy production and I don't see many people willing to take the drastic lifestyle steps necessary to stop harming the environment through energy production. Much of the world's power comes from burning coal and other non-renewable fossil fuels which spew pollution including large amounts of mercury in the case of coal into the environment and release huge quantities of CO2. Even "green" sources are not without impact, solar panels are dirty to produce, wind turbines kill birds, hydro dams kill fish and flood habitat when the dams are built. I'm not against using these methods of production either but all impacts must be weighed. Nuclear power is overall one of the cleanest and there are thousands of nuclear reactors that have been running for decades without incident. The disasters that have taken place have been caused largely by gross negligence.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 06:41:48 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 06, 2018, 04:02:19 pmCould you link your source to this? From the few articles I have read - admittedly not exactly reputable sources - like New Scientist, the actual radiation levels and contamination in the surrounding area were barely above limits, and for the most part, well below. It was often the case with Chernobyl as well, whilst many areas had very high radiation levels, the dangers were overstated.Another article:http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2017/01/fukushima-residents-exposed-far-less-radiation-thoughtI am not suggesting either disaster wasn't a disaster, its just I'm often amazed at how the media assumes something, and runs with it - and any kind of scare stories (radiation, terrorism, "hidden poisons" in food etc..) are rarely checked. Anyone who questions the dangers are seen as government puppets, or "pro-nuclear". It is far easier to err on the side of caution but that could mean ones spends their life in fear of something that simply isn't true, and it only gets worse as we age - I'm starting to get more paranoid about things, and it takes real effort to counter it.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 06:47:46 pm
content: Quote from: Gromitt on January 06, 2018, 06:17:17 pmAhh I will miss his enthusiastic lectures. The world needs more people like him, using data and statistics not to scare, but to provide hope. In a world of negativity or blind faith, it was rare to see someone who tried to show that positive changes can be made, using actual data to back it up (rather than skewing data in studies as seems to be the norm these days..https://www.newscientist.com/article/2149844-most-science-papers-turn-out-to-be-wrong-its-time-to-fix-that/)

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 06:51:54 pm
content: Where is this conclusion?Could you show me an authoritative source that tells me conclusively that this new power plant design you are describing doesn't have the same problem with need to take extreme care with the nuclear waste, to prevent problems like "loss of the ultimate heatsink"?I'm not saying that it cannot happen but to my knowledge, nobody has discovered a safe fission process yet that offers enough benefits over the broken ones we have now to justify building new nuclear power plants.We should decommission some first, until we do more of that successfully, we still don't know the real cost to society of nuclear fission reactors.Have nuclear power plants ever really been fully decommissioned?maybe some have, do you know of any?As far as I have seen, despite the fact that some now seem to be virtually abandoned, none really are as they all remain fenced off and unusable, with large areas off limits, why? Because they still have water filled ponds with highly radioactive nuclear waste in them. Those ponds need to be supplied continuously with fresh water or they will evaporate away and once the water is gone then they rapidly go into a thermal crisis mode, loss of the ultimate heat sink, the process of melting downward.Quote from: james_s on January 06, 2018, 06:27:54 pmHowever, you are, as shown by your bias against reputable scienceQuoteHere is a study on birth defects in the area around Chernobyl:http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/125/4/e836Another study on birth defects by the Chernobyl Forum, a group of several international organizations.https://web.archive.org/web/20060808041241/https://www.iaea.org/Publications/Booklets/Chernobyl/chernobyl.pdf.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 07:35:49 pm
content: Follow some of the links I linked above.If it was safe to live there, people would be living there. Some areas have been deemed safe to live in, but the exclusion zones remain. Spending a tiny bit of time in a place as a tourist, being careful not to breathe in dust, is a lot different than living there, breathing in dust there, growing food there, having children there.Despite the efforts of an aggressive campaign to trivialize the risks the fact remains that it will likely be a long time, a very long time before those areas are likely to be safe to live in again.And no, we shouldn't declare darkness to be the new standard.Quote from: Buriedcode on January 06, 2018, 06:41:48 pmHere is the Fukushima governments page on the size of the exclusion zone today. Are they saying its safe to live there? No. They are trying to put a positive face on t but its not a good situation because the inside of the reactor is so hot now that there may be additional releases of radiation.Fukushima:http://www.pref.fukushima.lg.jp/site/portal-english/en03-08.htmlRadiation causes stunted head size and mental retardation.All in all, the combination of all these different forms of pollution, combined with governmental abdication of their responsibilities to help people cope with their failures, has the potential to be a burden so costly to societies that they might cease to function as civilizations after some kinds of disasters.Consider the possible effects of an 1859 ("Carrington event") scale solar storm. That could cause mutiple nuclear meltdowns all around the world in its aftermath (if the power grid was disasbled for an extended period of time and cooling of spent fuel was not possible, its quite possible. Look at how multiple separate cores seprately melted down at Fukushima when the power went out.That kind of additional burden to people would literally make society fall apart.Chernobyl:

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 07:38:04 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 06, 2018, 06:51:54 pmDo you have some allergy to doing simple research to answer questions like this?Four commercial power plants have been completely leveled, nothing left but dirt. They were formerly located in Shippingport, PA; Rowe, MA; Wiscasset, ME; and Haddam Neck, CT. There are no barriers to enter the land and do whatever you want there.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 08:18:15 pm
content: I didn't know that. That is good news.

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 08:48:51 pm
content: You're welcome!Maybe I was uncharitable, because the information is not as accessible as could be hoped. Also, just because the plant sites are considered to be "greenfield" and usable without restrictions, there are radioactive waste depositories on nearby sites. So a 300 acre power plant may leave behind a 5 acre dry storage facility. They are dry casks and do not require any cooling power to prevent the release of isotopes, but nobody really knows if they will remain secure for the thousands of years required before the materials are no longer a danger to life. There still isn't a "permanent" national waste facility that would require no maintenance or security whatsoever.See alsohttps://www.eia.gov/nuclear/reactors/shutdown/andhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nuclear_reactors#United_States

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 06, 2018, 09:16:00 pm
content: The thing I many scientists worry the most about is a huge solar flare like the Carrington event in 1859.That would pop transformers all around the world, knocking out the grid, and then, we would likely get the Fukushima scenario at multiple nuclear sites, due to loss of the ultimate heat sink.https://www.nap.edu/catalog/12507/severe-space-weather-events-understanding-societal-and-economic-impacts-ahttp://www.businessinsider.com/massive-1859-solar-storm-telegraph-scientists-2016-9https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_storm_of_1859http://peakoil.com/enviroment/worldwide-nuclear-meltdownDouble whammy.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 01:00:26 am
content: Quote from: cdev on January 06, 2018, 07:35:49 pmFirstly the youtube video was from the NYtimes - a source that isn't exactly reliable. But I wasn't claiming there wasn't any negative effects from the disaster, just that often they were overstated. If anything, lack of human activity in the area has *helped* wildlife more than nuclear waste has hindered it.As for the fukushima link, I couldn't find any data about radiation levels outside of the reactor site, except :QuoteWhere 1msv is apparently the average dose one gets a year from natural sources. Although actual recommended limits, and data to back it up are lacking. That link is mostly about communication to the public what the government is planning to do, checking water sources for contamination, the evacuation status of zones, and any mass screenings (such as thyroid screening). It should be noted that mass screenings almost always show an increase in a disease, and historically is has been hard to link low-level radiation exposure to individual cases, as its mostly a statistics game.https://www.newscientist.com/article/2129988-fukushima-accident-gave-everyone-an-x-rays-worth-of-radiation/I am not arguing that there is no danger, just that I would like some sources of information as to the level of contamination, radiation levels, estimation of contamination of livestock etc.. I realize for the latter there are no hard and fast answers, only what governments put out, which are often driven by a real need to quench public fear. Just because a site has been evacuated doesn't indicate what levels there are there. Public fear could be far more dangerous, and I commend the authorities for their efforts in ensuring public safety. This doesn't not however, tell us much. In what way am I deluding myself?

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 01:34:57 am
content: Quote from: Buriedcode on January 07, 2018, 01:00:26 amI was going to quibble that the NYT is the "newspaper of record" and so on, but on this subject they really are bad. Check the headline of this story:https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/09/world/asia/radioactive-boars-in-fukushima-thwart-residents-plans-to-return-home.htmlIt wants you to think the wildlife is a horrible mutant breed of X-Beast, dripping plutonium from their fangs. It's just execrable.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 01:55:22 am
content: Wild boars are really dangerous..By the way I am sorry to have used that phrase "deluded" I have deleted it and replaced it with a better explanation of what I see as the problem. Serious irresponsibility in high places.We cannot count on our corporate-controlled governments any more than the Russians , Ukrainians and Belorussians could count on what was then the USSR.Suppose one day we wake up and its a gorgeous day but suddenly all our electronics goes haywire and then the power just blinks out, not to return - forever.. because - a solar storm - a "coronal mass Ejection" event like the 1859 Carrington eventhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_storm_of_1859is going on-See link: Here's why a massive 1859 solar storm still terrifies scientists - Business Insider:http://www.businessinsider.com/massive-1859-solar-storm-telegraph-scientists-2016-9then - in a few days, or hours in some cases, (like in Fukushima) the fission based (boiling water) nuclear power plants all around the world start going critical and melting down.. all at the same time.. in a chain of events thats described as 'loss of the ultimate heat sink' leading to huge radiation releases and large scale death and disaster.. all because we - like idiots, didn't look at Fukushima and say - wow its weird that all three reactors would all pop at the same time.. Hmmm..There is an urgent need to either have reactors that do not produce hot nuclear waste, (fission) or rely on constant flows of fresh water, or depend on the grid being functional. In other words, we need reactors that can be turned off.https://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2008/06may_carringtonflare/http://www.earthisland.org/journal/index.php/eij/article/flare-up_how_the_sun_could_put_an_end_to_nuclear_power/What happened there?Up - a few posts - above I posted links to a half dozen official analyses of what happened.. they are worth reading.

author: paulca
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 10:53:29 am
content: So "we the people",don't want nuclear power as it produces waste and massive pollution if there is an accident.don't want wind power as it doesn't work when calm, spoils the scenery, are noisy, interfere with wildlife, particularly birds.don't want solar because it's looks horrible on the landscape, interferes with wild life, produces toxic waste once past it's service life.don't want coal or oil because "fossil fuel"don't want hydro power or tidal power because of the huge investments and interference with wildlife... flooding valleys.don't want geo-thermo because ... well not everywhere in the world is close enough to the kind of heat Iceland has on tap.But, "We the people" do want all our gadgets, all our cars, all our expensive lighting and we want to have 3 children.Energy demand is (apparently) rising faster than the population in developed and developing nations. The uptake of "renewables" is almost completely offset by the increase is energy demand. The UK was reporting it may get into winter brown out territory in a few years, even before Hinkley point et. al is built.Fusion is still far off, always 10 years away. Even then I'm sure the scaremongers will campaign for it to be banned because "reasons".That really only leaves nuclear. As the only clean (under normal operating conditions) power source. It's the "under normal operating conditons" clause that is the issue.I always wondered why other reactor types have not been properly trialed on industrial scale. Molten sodium et. al. As I understand it most of our reactors are based on the Rickover model developed for the US Navy back in the 40s/50s. The incentive there was that they produced weapons grade plutonium as a by product which got them favoured by the millitary which wanted a lot of weapons grade plutonium to play their little stock piling game with Russia. The design works and is cheap to build, but, being a Navy invention for ships focuses cooling from water.On nuclear accidents and on ship/sub based reactors. How many undocumented accidents have there been? How many sub reactors have be flooded and scuttled at sea due to accidents or just general decommissioning?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 03:33:40 pm
content: "What could possibly go wrong"?The objections you list are widely different magnitude issues . My objection to the kind of grid we have and nuclear power as delivered today - is very real and is shared by others . We could end up with a catastrophe that would alter life on this planet for a very very long time.See"Severe Space Weather--Social and Economic Impacts" herethe consequences of not fixing this before another Carrington-class solar storm hits will be catastrophic.Its not rocket science. Even current reactors can likely be retrofitted with multiple redundant cooling systems.While we get the alternatives - local power generation - and other new sources - and hopefully also redesign our power systems to not be as vulnerable to solar storms.We can and must get that worked out.The important thing is that we do it, soon.The thing to do is prioritize.. Which outcomes are the most catastrophic and/or the most likely to occur?(Also, most other civilized people in the world use a LOT less energy than Americans and Europeans and Australians.They have decent lives and in many cases are healthier. We in the countries that use the most have a lot of room for savings.)I personally think that this issue with loss of the ultimate heatsink and also loss of the power grid due to a solar flare is a really major risk we absolutely must prioritize and deal with now.Because if we don't, we could wake up tomorrow to a real mess which we would not be able to fix.We had a wake up call a few years ago July 23, 2012 - when it turned out that the Sun - our own Sun-had had a major CME event which missed Earth but which was picked up by the STEREO-A satelliteat one of the Lagrangian points.The CME was large enough to have wiped out most power systems on Earth had we just been a week farther along in our orbit than we were on that day.What that tells us is that the frequency of these massive solar storms is higher than we thought.Quote from: paulca on January 07, 2018, 10:53:29 amWell we know that in 2011 we hadthree meltdowns side by sidein the same facility when the power went out.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 06:06:09 pm
content: @paulca, FYI I am pro fusion energy and anti-fission. My objections to fission are with the waste problem. Its impossible to deal with all the waste we're creating safely.Thats why this problem is so difficult to solve.People need to be put ahead of profits. We need to figure out ways that people can get what they need, even if its not what corporations want. I think we should try to transition to using less energy, with more of it being solar. I think we should attempt to figure out as many different ways of solving our various problems as we can, and encourage resiliency and diversity in solutions. Sure, people dont want to live next to a huge wind turbine, would you? On the other hand, there are many places that are ideal for them where almost nobody lives.Fracking was never a good idea, because it pollutes the environment. Hydropower is better than many other kinds of energy, some rivers should be dammed and the power harvested, as long as some are not, to preserve habitat. At some point we will no longer need them and then their habitats can be restored, given that the species still survive.

author: tooki
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2018, 08:15:47 pm
content: Crikey, cdev, you sure must have a lot of free time on your hands to write such diatribes! (I’ll admit, I skimmed right over them.)Anyhow, as someone who is pro-nuclear because IMHO the alternatives are even worse, I often feel as though people with my point of view have little say at the table, being dismissed as either industry shills or as being willfully ignorant on the dangers, when neither is true.The fact is, while nuclear’s track record isn’t perfect, it’s still actually really good. (Nearly every problem so far has been directly related to awful management decisions, not inherent problems in the technology.) Consider the environmental devastation caused by hilltop removal coal mining, or strip mining. The amounts of nuclear waste produced in the end are also not that big. People forget how much heavy-metal-laden ash there is to deal with from coal plants. Not to mention CO2 emissions from any fossil fuel...I’m in no way opposed to renewables, obviously, but people often ignore their downsides, too. Like how most hydro plants kill fish, and the reservoirs cause damage, too. Or how some kinds of solar plants set birds on fire as they fly. Or how windmills also kill birds. And of course, renewables’ big downside is that other than hydro, they’re pretty much all incapable of providing base load power, since their output varies depending on daytime and/or environmental conditions for solar, and environmental conditions for wind.As such, I really think that nuclear deserves a bigger seat at the table.

author: TheBay
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 02, 2018, 05:08:58 am
content: I'm transmitting 10GHz here, soon to be 24GHzShall I go warn my neighboursAlso I'm Pro Nuclear, if I could legally and safely use Nuclear power at home I would.

author: PrecisionAnalytic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2018, 09:28:19 am
content: Here's a thought I had I posted on one of the blogs on my blogger:http://dewdetectionprojects.blogspot.com/2017/08/dewdetectionprojectsblogspotcom-first.htmlWell, then there's the new 5G on the horizon... pun intended:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5GThink LRAD (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Acoustic_Device) with Ultrasounic methods, Sound Blasters that are over PEP and SAR limits and not just acoustic hailing devices (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acoustic_hailing_device) and non-lethal tuned ranged systems noted in the U.S. Army Intelligence and Security Command FOIA Request proving bio-effects of "selected" nonlethal weapons can be lethal if you read carefully:https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3kLL6AnKjj5eVgyMnVhbjNGMEU/viewor whatever the Cuban Embassy U.S. Diplomats and their families as well as others bombarded with the range of microwaves or lasers deal or dealt with (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embassy_of_the_United_States,_Havanaandhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_F._Matlock_Jr.).I figure when doing the math; that the FCC reviewed (https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DOC-347449A1.pdf) and approved 5G frequencies so that when some of those, as well as other WiFi, Cell Phone, WiMax, etc., are phased synchronized, mixed and combined equal the 95Ghz.95Ghz is the active denial frequency and one of the nervous system emissions of the human body that is not well disclosed. the 95GHz and I think other GHz ranges are more directly connected with the human body though not well disclosed. Like permanent damage can occur even with the 95Ghz system if over exposed or used incorrectly. I only found on GBPPR Zine #62 (https://www.scribd.com/document/82073238/GBPPR-Zine-Issue-62) noting 95Ghz and one other site referencing a German ( "Bembenek P: Akupunktur und bio-resonanz (in German), CO’MED Nr. 6:50, 1998" article of reference. ) paper I haven't been able to find yet:http://ieminstitute.org/_Resources/Articles/HEFmesurementRubik.htmlTouch and other sensations can be performed remotely with sub-sonic and sonic range and I suspect ultrasonic range also. Rasmussen's et.al. work goes into the subsonic and sonic details a little:http://www.donmar.com/Tech/VIBRATION-BODY.pdfHere are some new to me interesting articles found while searching:https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1503/1503.05944.pdfhttp://www.dtic.mil/get-tr-doc/pdf?AD=ADA420638Seems there are PEL and SAR limit issues that can be manipulated that are not well disclosed also with all the other wireless potential interactions where malicious operators can take advantage of. Think focal point size, energy, power, bandwidth purity, frequency hopping including combinations, duty cycle, time of exposure, etc. Seems there are many variables left out of the equations. Definitely not NIST or DOC scientists working on the issues.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2018, 04:12:43 pm
content: I'm not sure what "government secret weapons" have to do with 5G. In the same way cdev mentioned "solar flares" when we were talking about nuclear power - there may be a tenuous link there, but it seems it is mostly just used as a way to preach something remotely similar.Quote from: PrecisionAnalytic on April 02, 2018, 09:28:19 amI suspect it isn't "well disclosed" because it is fabricated. You provide no sources for that snippet of information, yet sprinkle links over the rest of your post.I'm not entirely sure what your post is about? it seems its a collection of half baked ideas about.. sonic weapons? I do not doubt governments have conducted research into lethal and non-lethal weapons involving any number of "magic frequencies" with EM and sound, but they have also conducted research into psychic powers (lol). I fail to see why you even posted.

author: PrecisionAnalytic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2018, 06:52:00 pm
content: Quote from: Buriedcode on April 02, 2018, 04:12:43 pmYou didn't read the sources wording well enough to identify the lack of detailed six or lean sigma or even reference validation protocols used to validate efficacy, health and safety. My post is about the potential malicious, or at least injurious, effects of 5G and the combination of wireless technologies when used in a directed energy or even overlaid combined phased synchronized weapon way and means.Here is a reference with references:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MARAUDER(Classified system that uses lasers, however masers exist in solid state also now days and don't need big dishes also to collimate. At least the U.S. Air Force discloses somewhat of what they're performing. U.S. Army seems to cover up even sonic weapons used)http://jnlwp.defense.gov/About/Frequently-Asked-Questions/Active-Denial-System-FAQs/(note blistering has occurred disclosed)https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/5GIf I understand addition and subtraction maths correctly as well as combination and subtraction as in frequency mixers and harmonics and overtones; 26 + 28 + 39 + 3 (as well as other combinations of already approved existing infrastructure) = ~95GHzThese types of systems per FCC are allowed to cause interference in fact if you think from a public service perspective and as a user wanting to use frequencies they're both using as a licensed user is allowed to use.https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/97.203Here are some more references to references:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Denial_Systemhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extremely_high_frequencyMilitary Zips Lips on Pain Ray Accidenthttps://www.wired.com/2007/11/seven-months-af/IRAQ WMD EVANGELIST'S NEW CRUSADE: SECRET RAY GUNShttps://www.wired.com/2008/04/ray-beam-used-t/'RAY GUN' A LETHAL WEAPON, SAYS FORMER OSI AGENThttps://www.wired.com/2008/04/ray-gun-a-letha/Pain Ray Injures Airmanhttps://www.wired.com/2007/04/pain_ray_injure/Quote from: Buriedcode on April 02, 2018, 04:12:43 pmWell the basic kind of weapons systems that are disclosed to the public for non-official use (unclassified or declassified) are all pretty much heterodyne, pules train or more advanced mind control with some sort of frequency, energy, power, and duty cycle whether there is human body sympathetic resonance or just plain tissue damage by heating/coagulation/burning/ablating. The sonic weapons are mostly heterodyne with some pulse train that are more consumer grade even and more well disclosed. Therefore, think outside the frequency range of sub-sonic, sonic and ultrasonic in regards to carrier frequency, beam, ray, etc.The limits are strange and I think not for the populations best interest in regards to health, safety, welfare and well being.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4629874/Fiber optics are a better method as well as shielding our existing utilities infrastructure more. Do the maths on the power lines emissions and how those can effect the body. Why aren't those used for communications more? Why all the wireless craze when can be done in more cost effective ways like in amateur radio and public utilities models?

author: helius
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 02, 2018, 10:01:53 pm
content: Quote from: wilfred on April 02, 2018, 06:33:25 amWilfred,The day your contributions go beyond being a troublesome busybody is when I will take your thoughts seriously. Until then, get bent.Sincerely, helius

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 04, 2018, 06:50:55 am
content: I have a 60 GHz point to point link now. It's awesome and it uses beamforming to adjust the radiation pattern.It has several interesting properties.First, it won't "enter" the homes of my neighbors because even a window is a big obstacle for a transmission with a wavelength of 5 mm.Second, the beam is very directional so very little will actually reach the street below.Third, transmission power is very low.Fourth, at these frequencies there is an additional 15 dB/Km attenuation because of the Oxygen absorption peak.So, nothing to see here. Carry on!

author: Avacee
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: April 05, 2018, 08:19:57 pm
content: Moratorium request or not OFCOM (UK Communications Regulator) has just finished part of the auction for some 5G spectrum at 3.4GHz (and some more 4G spectrum at 2.3GHz) raising £1,353,744,000 for HM Treasury.https://www.ofcom.org.uk/about-ofcom/latest/features-and-news/results-auction-mobile-airwaveshttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43653418Technically once the assignment bidding is done the winning license holders will be able to start using the spectrum straight away though it's not expected there'll be be usage until 2020.

author: PrecisionAnalytic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 22, 2018, 12:28:14 am
content: Quote from: Buriedcode on April 02, 2018, 04:12:43 pmI hope you and others see why I even posted.I want to add also there is the 60GHz range that along with any of the other ranges can have the potential for combination bands that can be phased synchronized with beamforming and potentially pencilbeam or other forms that are used for a variety of applications in the Defense Industry as noted below.I also want to share some interesting disclosures in disclaimers from the 10K filings of most of the major players in the Telecom industry:Corporate Company Investor Warnings In Annual Reports 10k Filings Cell Phone Radiation RisksIssues to consider with the 60Ghz combinations and beamforming even though noted as safe when the beam isn't pointed at you or "typically" not penetrating walls:WiGig WikipediaBeamforming Wikipedia

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 22, 2018, 01:00:45 am
content: That site should be questioned. They sound exactly like all other scaremongering hippies. They just yack and bend stuff to fit their rambligs.Here's their "research page"https://ehtrust.org/science/research-on-wireless-health-effects/You can read all that if you want, but it sounds like they're handpicking anything that even remotely supports their rubbish and ignoring everything else. How many of those studies even used actual human tissue? How many were repeatable? And how many accounted for all factors (IE ensuring corrolation equals causation)?Bet it will be quite a small number...

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 22, 2018, 02:16:19 pm
content: Quote from: PrecisionAnalytic on May 22, 2018, 12:28:14 am5 mm wavelength, won't go through a wall. Moreover, it has an additional 15 dB/Km attenuation due to Oxygen absorption.QuoteYes, and you can see mentions of "Acts of God" in similar filings, insurance policies, etc despite the fact that somethingthat doesn't exist cannot appear as witness in court.QuoteWhat issues? "Typically"?

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 22, 2018, 06:09:40 pm
content: I see this thread has been resurrected! It's a pity how quickly it went to conspiracy theories and pseudo-science :/ But I would be lying if I said I didn't find it entertaining - its amazing what people believe but don't always get a chance to voice.

author: Eka
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 22, 2018, 10:09:31 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on November 15, 2017, 07:39:13 pmSimple, 4.5 liters inhaled. Of course it's just as deadly as that nasty dihydrogen monoxide that kills and injures many every day.

author: PrecisionAnalytic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2018, 05:12:21 am
content: Quote from: borjam on May 22, 2018, 02:16:19 pmDid you read the Wikipedia article even?Third paragraph in the wigig article: "The 60 GHz signal cannot typically penetrate walls but can propagate off reflections from walls, ceilings, floors and objects using beamforming built into the WiGig system."So, oxides are going to reflect in a structure is your point as well as whatever the level of oxygen is in the ambient conditions?Here is some food for thought:http://www.lonestarconsultinginc.com/mindcontrol1.htm#SCANNERSDEVICEYou guys sure think you're smart at tech stuff and lack the skills to read... including patents regarding the devices capabilities identified theoretically and applied with other systems that can heterodyne, pulse train and other more classified mind control technology. Let me guess... "A" students regarding whatever you're taught?Like we're going to land on Mars, the Moon and just use rockets for projects like Discoverer and claim Corona, projects lead by Colonal Alexander (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Alexander) and Major General Stubblebine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Stubblebine) never existed even when disclosed as "non official" in locations not only on Wikipedia. Oh yeah... the Manahatten Project was just for Nuclear Zombies like you guys for nuclear bombs only.OK, smoke more whatever you're smoking or snorting.Why isn't the data you're referring to presented at all?

author: PrecisionAnalytic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2018, 05:27:59 am
content: Quote from: Buriedcode on May 22, 2018, 06:09:40 pmI demonstrated conspiracy fact also and science.Pity is those who believe they know everything there is to know when you know there are sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI), Top Secret, Secret and Classified Security Clearances with blatant torture exposed in the media. Mass murdering also.Some have more than a six month Single Scope Background Investigation (SSBI).It's like you don't think certain agencies even existed or still exist and all the disclosure is so you can enjoy your pampered lifestyle.So, you're going to tell me that chemical, biological and kinetic energy weapons are the only weapons that are used and in fact can be improvised from commercial off the shelf (COTS) items for more than irritating?

author: PrecisionAnalytic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: May 23, 2018, 06:49:58 am
content: Also, think how much energy or power the human body takes to function and the lack of clarity that this paper demonstrates in regards to outside the frequency ranges demonstrated:http://www.measurement.sk/2005/S2/Lipkova.pdfWhere is the data on this other range of human body resonance frequency either emission, reflection, absorption or transmission from DC to Cosmic Radiation. The info is rather hit and miss... pun intended.

author: borjam
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: May 23, 2018, 09:14:34 am
content: Quote from: PrecisionAnalytic on May 23, 2018, 05:12:21 amNo need, I am reasonably familiar with the subject.QuoteSo, let's do a mental experiment. You are at home. Your window is closed.And an evil neighbor like myself sets up a 60 GHz link. RUN FOR COVER!!!!The link uses beamforming. Now, what do you think beamforming is for? Sending radiation and wasting energy all over the place, or focusing as much energy as possible on the receiving antenna? You caught me! Us evil hollow-earthlings are in a mission to change your thoughts with microwave radiation beams!Now, seriously. The beam is mostly focused on the receiving antenna. Little will bounce. But alright, let's assume some will bounce. Will it cross your windows? Very little because even a glass is a serious obstacle for radio waves with a 5 mm wavelength.QuoteNo, my point is this. For a 60 GHz transmitter, our atmosphere (transparent to visible light, etc) is like dark smoke, attenuating it a lot. What it means is, 60 GHz is an especially harmless frequency because transmissions attenuate much more than similar transmissions at, say, 50 or 70 GHz.QuoteThis reminds me of the people who claims that telepathy exists. It doesn't, but humans have been clever enough to exploit radio waves. Mind control? The only mind control technologies I know, which are terrifyingly effective, are Facebook and Twitter.

author: PrecisionAnalytic
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 06:33:27 am
content: Quote from: borjam on May 22, 2018, 02:16:19 pmSure, when following specification and no classified operations, hacked systems or unlawful activity. I don't think you're the evil neighbor that will identify free bandwidth, collimate energy in phase synchronized ways to form combination bands that total 95GHz or a sympathetic human body resonance frequency that will adversely effect body function or torture. However, there were people in history that when given the harvesting or whatever tools... use the tools for unreasonable serial killing in fact.Quote from: borjam on May 22, 2018, 02:16:19 pmThe frequencies are not harmless and have been proven to cause harm when used to cause harm. That is why there are limits in specifications for exposure??? I'm not saying typical operation is going to be the issue. Kind of like RF burns most won't experience or burned or blinded by a laser or maser. However, some have been and can be maimed if not worse like from ablation and not just cauterization.Read some of my first links in this instructable I wrote up to detail more. I was even surprised in my research for find synthetic telepathy and mind control does exist (&) and even weapons to cause heart attacks, vomiting, looseness, etc. (http://defaakto.com/2018/11/24/mysterious-health-attacks-against-u-s-canadian-diplomatic-embassy-staff-cuba-china-an-open-source-intelligence-study-by-de-faakto/).Some of the microwave technology as a weapons goes back to the 50's in the Soviet Union. They did medicine work with Microwaves also... so we can figure like radiation therapy done wrong... more injury, maiming and death can occur.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moscow_SignalWith the classified technologies, the technology capabilities and performance are smeared with disinformation tactics like UFO's, Aliens and other topics that are controversial when used unlawfully. UFO's are Unidentified Flying Object's and Alien's don't have their Green Cards or whatever is required in the country they are not a citizen of for example.https://www.instructables.com/id/How-to-Make-a-Directed-Energy-Weapon-Detection-Sys/(For easier reading of the links in the article, right click the links and select open link in new tab since the WYSIWYG editor isn't processing the syntax when coding the mouse over to do so)

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 09:15:39 am
content: Quote from: PrecisionAnalytic on January 07, 2019, 06:33:27 amThat instructable startsQuoteShould we conclude that the author has built a working device, and that he has adopted sufficient safety precautions when testing his weapon?

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 02:03:04 pm
content: I know I shouldn't reply, especially as I am not an expert in RF/microwaves, nor 5G, but I'm still fascinated with what people believe. PrecisionAnalytic, you always seem enthusiastic and clearly have taken the time to collect information and links so regardless of whether or not I agree with you, I do thank you for your time.I'm surprised you came back to post. Whilst the technology of higher-frequency comms has been discussed, I see you're still making a few assumptions here. The first is that a powerful organisation, like a government has both the capabilityand motiveto harm its citizens using unproven technology, that is kind of hard to set up, to cause minor inconveniences to individuals. And that they are going to use is, presumably to cause inconvenience to... who exactly? It really does sound like a LOT of effort, (and time, money resources) to inconvenience individuals when simply arresting them would be much easier.This is what I dont' get about the conspiracy theorists who believe in mind control, energy weapons, and stealthy control technologies:a) who is important enough to warrant such an elaborate and expensive (because it'll cost lots of man-hours to set up) campaign of harassment?b) why use bizarre and not-very-effective methods with inefficient/ineffective/unproven tech when simply arresting someone or planting evidence would be more effective and "silencing" someone (who presumably is an enemy of the state?).It's all well and good focusing on the technology and how it can be abused - like all technology. But you need to think about these things practically rather than making the above assumptions - starting byassumingthat bad men are out to get you with exotic weapons, then working out what those weapons are. I've not doubt one would weaponise microwave/RF weapons, its just that aside from surveillance/jamming they tend to be completely impractical.A little knowledge is dangerous because you pick and choose which parts to believe that support your ideas, whilst ignoring details that make your presumptions look silly. This is particularly bad when people read up about cancer - assuming because cancer requires glucose, that sugar iscausingcancer (hint: ALL cells require glucose). It is cherry picking bits and pieces and building a whole narrative that makes you feel like you've uncovered some grand conspiracy, or something that explains your problems/failures. It is very appealing and many fall into that trap. But you need to take a step back and ask yourself - is this bollocks?

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 02:52:35 pm
content: Quote from: Buriedcode on January 07, 2019, 02:03:04 pmWelcome to reality, might not like it however:https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3154555/How-British-government-carried-secret-biological-warfare-tests-London-Tube-passengers-1960s-Cold-War.htmlWord "minor" is also not suitable sometimes. As for "individuals" sufferer often has no idea are his problems personal or he is from some larger set.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 03:20:14 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on January 07, 2019, 02:52:35 pmSince you aren't in the UK, you probably aren't aware that the "Daily Wail" is sold to middle-aged not-highly-educated women who are accurately described as "worried well".The Daily Wail’s hyperbolic contribution to classifying things as either causing or curing cancer (or both) is legendary, spawning theKill or Curewebsite.Infamously the Wail moaned that a chemical had been found in food, so why hadn't the EU banned it? Since it would have destroyed their story, the Wail omitted to note that the EUhadbanned it five years earlier!Overall the first rule w.r.t. any Daily Wail story is to presume they have exaggerated or omitted facts, and to check better sources.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 04:17:54 pm
content: I thought this was kind of interesting! The density they want to install for these high power pulsed base stations is potentially very high. They will use beamforming to focus the multiple beams on handsets and other devices (machine to machine communications is expected to be a major part of 5G, for example, autonomous vehicle control, highways and roads where all cars are autonomous.)This may end up meaning exposure to RF could be several orders of magnitude higher than todays.https://www.rcrwireless.com/20161020/network-infrastructure/att-outlines-5g-network-architecture-tag4From what I have gathered from the literature the main effects of RF besides heating involve the creation of reactive oxygen species or "free radicals".One of the current theories of aging involves free radical exposure.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free-radical_theory_of_agingHence, there is lots of research along these lines going on..Evaluation of the Neuroprotective Potential of N-Acetylcysteine for Prevention and Treatment of Cognitive Aging and Dementiahttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29182711(and other antioxidants)Look on pubmed if you want to read lots of scientific papers on this. I think that the #1 thing thats is worrisome to me is the creation of free radicals because that depletes the body of glutathione which is a finite resource. Also cell division after free radicals cause programmed cell death is a finite resource. (See the Hayflick Limit, etc. ) If 5G is using up this finite resource it may be shortening lives.Given that many experts say we don't 'need' the extra capacity thats being pushed on us in the 5G proposals,CEO: We Don't Need 5G for U.S. Cellular Fixed Wireless, LTE Will Work Just Fine - Telecompetitorhttp://www.telecompetitor.com/ceo-we-dont-need-5g-for-u-s-cellular-fixed-wireless-lte-will-work-just-fine/I think it would be wise to wait a bit until more is known.https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=5G+radiationhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=5G+safetyhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=5G+glutathionehttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=cellular+safetyand so on..

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 05:30:27 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 07, 2019, 04:17:54 pmNumbers, not adjectives, please.Note that beamforming increases peak power at the receiver, but reduces power elsewhere.

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 05:30:48 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on January 07, 2019, 03:20:14 pmQuite possible. Story just fitted the general pattern:https://www.keithameyers.com/research/Some Unintended Fallout from Defense Policy: Measuring the Effect of Atmospheric Nuclear Testing on American Mortality Patterns.https://www.keithameyers.com/s/MeyersFalloutMortalityWebsite.pdfAt the end of the day, why should people in power care? If they would care they would not be at power. It takes specific mindset to fight for your place up top. It has very little in common with layman mindset. Not not mention pretty double standard behaviour of human species as general. Japanese eat dolphins. Dolphins are pretty intelligent. I consider it very f... up to eat them. Yet for them it's ok. On the other hand most of us eat pigs, which also are pretty intelligent. But no problem with that somehow. Now suppose NASA spaceship lands on planet inhabited with intelligent dinosaur species, which is smarter than us and manages to live in harmony with nature. How long until they will be in the middle of burger? I sure do hope something watches us and makes sure we do not propagate anywhere. Anytime someone feels like propagating out of strict limits suggest imagine yourself as god for a moment and consider that 100% of your thoughts will directly modify reality. How long until total chaos, 10s, minute at max? Now with tech not far from magic anymore how long until people at power who like measuring up to gods do some irreversible mistake? Any bets?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 05:43:52 pm
content: Just a correction of what the bandwidth and spectrum range of 5g will be and a few other points.4G currently operates from 2 to 8 GHZ,5G, on the other hand, will operate in the frequency range of600 MHz to 71 GHz(US)Source:5gAmericas.org "5G Spectrum Recommendations" August 2015. 5G_Americas_Spectrum_Recommendations_for_the_U.S_Final.pdf (undated)Its totally unlike any system in use today that I know of, in many respects, it seems to me. Both in terms of power + signal density and network capacity. (This is why I think its also going to be able to function in many areas as a source of power for low power networking devices via a rectifying antenna mechanism. I actually think that is likely to be an intended use case. Many devices might be able to benefit from having always available power, if it enables continuous operation without ever needing battery replacement.)If you read the proposed uses you'll see that what is anticipated is a world of self maintaining, self repairing, self refilling products, where even the most mundane devices and throwaway items, of all possible kinds are networked, have unique IDs, carry service contracts which require constant communication, and constantly order replacements for their consumables, etc. themselves.Leaving nothing to the consumer/ratepayer to do/refill/repair except consume and pay rates/taxes or whatever.Just completely different than anything that exists today.Its the world as envisioned in corporate executives wet dreams. Every product has tie ins.They probably also will be loaded with DRM. All of this tech seems to be likely to make it difficult or even illegal to re-activate them when they shut off and attempt to contact the mother ship for one or another reason.Like printers that refuse to allow the user to refill ink themselves, demanding that the manufacturers overpriced cartridges or computers that cant be fixed because the manufacturers individually serialized parts must be used despite other parts with identical function being available for a fraction of the price.So, what will happen is the 5G system may become a vehicle to deny users of every possible product any right to repair.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 06:48:27 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on January 07, 2019, 05:30:48 pmSo what? Lots of stories fit lots of "general patterns", e.g. Atlantis, the Bermuda Triangle, Oroubouros, Illuminati etc. Doesn't make them real, does it?Anyway, Meyers trained as aneconomist. Would you trust an economist on physics/biology?

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 07:07:17 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on January 07, 2019, 06:48:27 pmYep I know, it's all fun and games... until your own personal reality check.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 07:15:27 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on January 07, 2019, 05:30:27 pmYup, I do realize that, of course. However, in urban areas, cell sites are commonly located on the roofs and even sides of apartment buildings in urban canyons. (typically with three or so panel antennas pointing up and down a street and outward/down) Now they are some distance away from one another but it appears that they will be spaced much closer together. Given that the 4G cell sites are already in place and often spaced extremely close together and that that systems capability still remains adequate according to some experts. I think we should do more research before setting up a system that could potentially expose people to a great deal more RF than they are now. The kind of damage that seems to be produced is additive to damage caused by innumerable other things which seem to be also being deregulated and exposure action levels increased, like gaseous mercury. Potentially radiation. Pro-oxidant cell damage from countless substances should all be considered to eb additive and action levels determined by combining their individual potential damage together, not separately. Also, as people get older, we have to replace more and more glutathione in our diets due to glycation. Also, when a woman is pregnant, very low levels of ROS in the womb can cause serious problems for a developing fetus in terms of cell differentiation.These problems occur due to levels of reactive oxygen species that are common in todays urban environments due to the environmental pollutants which we are putting there.Adding to this existing combined burden is not wise at this point unless we want a world where almost everybody has some serious health problem that impacts them in a life changing way, by age 40 or 50, or in many cases before they are even born.The health problems caused by these toxicants are extremely costly to society. But instead of taking responsibilities, governments and corporations are working overtime trying to pass the cost burden on to the victims, who can least afford them.Since DNA damage is one of the causes of cancer, and governments are being pressed to convert social safety nets to favor a corporate model of care delivery replacing healthcare as a human right with a new right of establishment which gives corporations rights to sell it and deny it without governments intervention, the potential problem we'll be facing from teh combined health burdens - which will become greater still if 5G turns out to be unhealthy to people - since they all seem to add up as far as depleting glutathione, is really scary.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 09:17:41 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on January 07, 2019, 07:07:17 pmSoyour"fun and games" includes knowingly spreading misinformation? That's a hallmark of a troll and people like Trump.We also note you choose to snip the context to make it difficult for people to follow your statements. Wonder why?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 09:26:34 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 07, 2019, 07:15:27 pmYet more adjectives that would look good on a literature forum.But a technical argument on a technical forum needsnumbersfor people to take any notice.

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 09:44:06 pm
content: Also it should be noted that one of the main mechanisms phagocytes use to engulf and destroy cancer cells, and signals T-cells to find cancerous cells - utilizes reactive oxygen species that are mopped up by anti-oxidants. Supplementation has yet to show any clear benefit beyond a what a balanced diet provides. Please stop clinging to overly simplistic theories. The number one determination of ones cancer risk, more than all other factors combined, is age. We are all living longer, which increases our lifetime risk of many things, including cancer. Sadly it is natural, and not a man-made problem (of course, lifestyle can increase risk), but one I hope we find a effective treatment for. Please stop trying to link common EM radiation (the like used for communications) with cancer - unless you have credible sources.As for MrWolf linking the DailyMail....its not even a parody anymore. I do like that kill or cure website thoughTo be fair tgzzz - I guess we should have to put up with it since others might see that, as its British, its *our* problem, I am ashamed of that paper and all it stands for (which is anything that scares middle aged people who think they know more than they actually do).

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 09:48:09 pm
content: Quote from: tggzzz on January 07, 2019, 09:17:41 pmTrump was inevitable because he was predicted in Simpsons.It's all a cartoon and you are trapped in it!

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 10:20:05 pm
content: Quote from: Buriedcode on January 07, 2019, 09:44:06 pmYes, but Victor Meldrew is my hero, and I hate deliberate bullshitting

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 07, 2019, 11:05:48 pm
content: Look, its simple, do we want to have public education, pensions, and healthcare, as jobs dribble away, or do we want ALL that money and then some to go to building a surveillance state?Thats what this 5G thing is likely really all about.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 12:47:29 am
content: Quote from: cdev on January 07, 2019, 11:05:48 pmThat's a big change (i.e. complete non-sequiteur) from your previous unquantified and unjustified assertions about power. You seem to have some form of general anxiety complex, and are inventing causes and effects.Your statements remind me of the old "something must be causing it, this is something, this must be causing it" chain of "reasoning".BTW, congratulations for reducing the number of adjectives, even if you didn't include any numbers.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 12:54:08 am
content: I don't see how this conflicts with what I said earlier, its totally consistent with it. Also with 25-30 years of academic writing.The surveillance aspect is also pretty easy to prove. Since you are in the UK, here.https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3038285-2014-Cobham-TCS-Catalog.html

author: HighVoltage
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 08:29:57 am
content: Might be worst than expected, if this article is true:20,000 Satellites for 5G to be Launched Sending Focused Beams of Intense Microwave Radiation Over Entire Earthhttp://healthimpactnews.com/2019/20000-satellites-for-5g-to-be-launched-sending-focused-beams-of-intense-microwave-radiation-over-entire-earth/

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 09:13:58 am
content: 11,943 satellites confirmed:https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2018/11/spacex-gets-fcc-approval-for-7500-more-broadband-satellites/...and if to go dig around FCC docs theres more.

author: LapTop006
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 01:12:57 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 07, 2019, 05:43:52 pm700MHz is also common for LTE (4G), it was often a band freed up by the shutdown of analog TV.Quote from: cdev on January 07, 2019, 05:43:52 pmMuch of this was claimed for RFID use in retail, almost none of which had any wide-scale adoption.Quote from: cdev on January 07, 2019, 05:43:52 pmI highly doubt 5G would make this any worse, other than, much like LTE, UMTS & GSM before, for the first few years of deployment it'll be hard for individuals & small companies to get modules.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 02:20:06 pm
content: It's hard to say. In searches of the computing literature, (many are behind paywalls but you can see the charts and graphics without having a subscription) its clear that people are supposed to be surrounded by dozens of "smart" items many of which to me seem to be networked when there is no compelling enough reason I can see for them to be.They are definitely planning to put far more stuff that can and does break or rapidly become obsolete into electronic things.Some of the major premises of these changes they are trying to force on society likely presuppose ever rising levels of consumption of throwaway but costly products which will almost certainly be built with features intended to frustrate efforts at repair, justifying this with FUD about 'problems' that do not seem to actually exist.BTW, I think a good case can be made that dishonesty in high places as to the scope of government by voters (the intentional trading away of policy space) is probably creating an anxiety among governments which their response to is increased surveillance.Why create a horrid situation that is uncalled for and avoidable?Democracy being what people wanted and expected, and voted for, we should return to it rather than adopt a police state model just simply to create certainty for the powerful (see Dani Rodrik's Trilemma of Globalization described and debated extensively in the economics literature for an overview of whats been done.) that they never in human history ever had before.Too much certainty for those at the top creates the governmental without any conditions on who gets that certainty or why, in human rights terms, becomes the equivalent of a market failure.A monoculture where no new ideas can ever find a constituency because of terminal groupthink, that also goes to great lengths to obscure this shift and so no progress can or be made.Government that cannot tell people the truth, that their actual choices have been taken away, in order to facilitate the padding of the pockets more predictably.Nor can such a deliberately hobbled.. "Simulacrum" (I think that is the proper word) respond to changes in society or peoples economic situation that demand actual changes in policy, (since that policy space has been traded away deliberately so changing anything involving the real world would putatively violate some vested, international (thats how democracy is frustrated, by the 'international' pretext )- entitlement created by back room deal.So whats really happening is the dismantling of democratic policy space by creation of new global corporate rights to profit that push out human rights of every conceivable kind.Government stripped of its ability to fix anything and do the things people elect it to do becomes a bad, broken parody of government of by and for the people. A dramatic production.And because of these new corporate rights, governments cannot say no when the huge corporations proposeanything that increases their profits. Noor can they revert back any change made if that would reduce suddenly vested new rights to make more money off the situation. (the ratchet clause aspect prevents such motion) Obviously politicians of all parties cant tell the voters this!So, I suspect that embedded in every new rollout of this or that over hyped "next big thing" there will be more stealth grabs of new corporate rights which cannot be impinged to justify this or that new way of wringing more money out of consumers before some other exploit of misplaced power and trust dreamed up by another corporation does so. Obviously the only health which enters into this picture are healthy profits. (For example, 'universal service guarantees' are falling by the wayside, because some areas are just not profitable. Instead the system hopes to get bids on those areas, (patients in the case of health care) from poorer companies - from poorer countries with very low labor costs- (and/or by lowering standards in some cases to lowest common denominators - I don't know.) But in the rush to make money safety and health wont be a consideration as it should be, we can bet on thats, and in this case, one needs only to look at the huge number of deaths on cell phone towers in the US during the 4G rollout to see where the industry's priorities are. (See the video by Pro-Publica and NPR)Given the power to do that, and given the fact that those who write and sign the laws know little about the technology and rely almost wholly on lobbyists to write the laws for their signature. (This has been the norm in the US for some time, for example, health insurance companies write health care laws, oil, gas and chemical companies write environmental laws. And I am sure telecom companies are writing the telecommunications laws now.The voices of sanity that exist are likely being ignored at best or worse actively excluded from the process.For example, since only proprietary technologies can be kept secret and because job transfer between countries is framed as a repayment of some kind of debt, and tied to government procurement and bid tendering, I suspect we'll gradually lose open source software as networks, generally are turned into a walled garden of profit maximization and surveillance is likely part of the bundle. Openness is what made the Internet interoperable and useful. But- open and free- software its under attack.Because its widely known, skills are easy to acquire, and so its not exclusive or secretive enough for their purposes open source - like democracy is under attack.In part because its in part a class conflict, a theft of democracy- globally- by an insider elite.I suspect we'll see - justified by profit maximization- even more than we see today, creation of a surveillance state, based on intentionally closed, hyper-expensive technology, an agenda which will also - as its draining the resources of society that clearly would be put to better use elsewhere, becomes a sort of global welfare program for the well connected. As well as a voter nulliifcation program because people within security infrastructures self-muzzle any opinions inconsistent with the continued employment they need.. If other jobs are insecure, subject to procurement rules and global erosion of profits and wages.. many people will be forced to migrate to remain working, in essence trading plaes to divest millions of their rights and decent pay at home. Patronage jobs will become the rule. True to form, the 'rules based' 'multilateral' job 'trading system' thats been hyped as the only way to eliminate corruption will become the world's biggest source of it.In short, where is the adult supervision?On the medical side, a spirit of responsible inquiry and avoidance of conflicts of interest always needs to exist for decisions to be made sensibly. Is that what exists today? Everything Ive read indicates to me that no, thats not what exists today. These is enough different about this particular effort to justify a much more measured and careful investigation of health under the heaviest urban use cases, keeping in mind that the particular biogical parameters effected are also pathways that are affected by many other toxicants, and crucial to human reproduction in particular. (glutathione and gene expression of Fyn and c-Cbl during the process of precursor cell differentiation in a developing child in utero in particular)Combined pro-oxidant toxicants, as the negative effects can be prevented by n-acetylcysteine, are additive, action levels should be recognized as additive. making action levels lower and they should be seen by laws as each requiring lower levels of the others if one is high.. present at the same time

author: sainbablo
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 05:31:56 pm
content: Please forgive me for late entry in the subject thread but what is the conclusion ?

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 06:36:38 pm
content: Quote from: sainbablo on January 08, 2019, 05:31:56 pmIf you believe some contributors, 5G is a capitalist plot to enable panopticon surveillance, and to pollute our precious bodily fluids. Change "capitalist" into a different bogeyman, if that suits the agenda!Lots of scary adjectives such as "X is a huge problem", without saying "compared with what", let alone any numbers!

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 08, 2019, 07:19:50 pm
content: Buriedcode,I've been following ROS in signalling issues for quite some time (do you have a link for this specific paper?). Its quite complex and it does not do the issues justice to attempt to work backwards from any desired result. That said, there are a number of issues where ROS generation is essential for certain processes to work properly. And they are important, HOWEVER, everything changes when you put a human fetus, neonate, child, adult, or older person into an environment where multiple man-created toxicants as well as endogenous factors, the ROS generated as part of the aging process and so on are competing for a set of finite, essential resources at the cellular level.Best way to navigate through our knowledge ecology accurately, is to read a lot, don't trust people who tell you to trust them without some homework on your own part, and keep re-evaluating things, and use your intuition, there is no substitute for it.Also, watch out for confirmation bias..Quote from: Buriedcode on January 07, 2019, 09:44:06 pm@Buriedcode, do you have the PMID or PMCID you can share with me for your paper?

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2019, 01:22:58 am
content: Here is some more dataI have not finished these - would be curious of your thoughts tgggzzz . As far as if 5G is safe, after reading the reports below, I think we need to keep our options open. I have an old friend who got one of these kinds of cancers several years ago. He's still alive because he had a really good job and a really good insurance plan. If he didn't I suspect he wouldn't be.QuoteQuoteQuoteThere are a lot of papers yet unexamined linked from the above and I suggest that one follow the links to see their full text. Note also what is said at the first link about the conflicts of interest in some of these bodies.Quote from: tggzzz on January 08, 2019, 06:36:38 pm

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2019, 05:41:25 am
content: Mouse studies...one massive red flag why this is psuedo-science.

author: tggzzz
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2019, 09:11:37 am
content: Quote from: cdev on January 09, 2019, 01:22:58 amI have neither the remaining life not the inclination to follow every conspiracy theory.Note that I have been professionally interested in the hazards of cellphones/WiFi, arena a quarter of a century ago. I pointed out a plausible worst case where WiFi/cellphones could kill an infant, my employer investigated and found it could happen. Neither I nor they thought that was a significant risk overall, but various industries did cooperate to mitigate equivalent hazards.I'm sorry to hear about your friend, but sh1t happens toeverybody, eventually.You need tocount the micromortsand compare them with other hazards. That keeps you sane, and means people don't feel the need to offer to send you an aluminium skullcap.Numbers, not adjectives. Beams, not motes (for those Biblically inclined).

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2019, 06:45:49 pm
content: Potential Risks to Human Health from Future Sub-MM Communication Systems: Paul Ben-Ishai, PhDA New Paradigm in Human Sensitivity? Recognition of the Human Condition via the Exposure of Sweat Ducts to sub-THz Waveshttps://www.researchgate.net/project/A-New-Paradigm-in-Human-Sensitivity-Recognition-of-the-Human-Condition-via-the-Exposure-of-Sweat-Ducts-to-sub-THz-Waves2017 Expert Forum: Wireless Radiation And Human Healthhttps://ehtrust.org/science/key-scientific-lectures/2017-expert-forum-wireless-radiation-human-health/Boeing argues against proposed max75 dBmtransmit power for 5G base stationshttps://www.fiercewireless.com/tech/boeing-argues-against-proposed-max-75-dbm-transmit-power-for-5g-base-stations

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2019, 07:36:17 pm
content: Are the amounts of incident RF which will be seen at any given reference point now expected to rise as that reference point increases in altitude?When you are at the surface of the earth, assuming Earth was perfectly flat, the curvature of the Earth limits the maximum distance which radio waves above the MUF travel, except in the case of modes like meteor scatter, sproradic-e etc. So, assuming you have a handheld transceiver communicating with a similar transceiver and you are of average height, that is I have read around six miles. However, if you are communicating with a satellite, that same hand held transceiver can hit a satellite hundreds of miles away, if its in space.How much the signal density and amount of RF thats visible rises dramatically as your height above average terrain increases is probably a function of the number of simultaneously transmitting devices within line of sight.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2019, 09:15:54 pm
content: Also, check out the paper I cited a ways back. "Chemically Diverse Toxicants Converge on Fyn and c-Cbl to Disrupt Precursor Cell Function"What I gather from it is that pollutants, of many kinds, that cause increases in reactive oxygen species (thats one of the things RF unambiguously does - depleting glutathione, just like other kinds of radiation do) and other toxicants too, as shown in this paper, may perturb important messages which are crucial at an early stage of human and animal development in a way that leads to serious birth defects.Increasing the supply of a single amino acid, a form of cysteine (a food constituent, one of the constituents of protein, one which is abundant in milk protein) - the most important rate limiting precursor of glutathione, can prevent the problem caused by a bunch of different toxicants.Showing that these quite diverse toxicants all involve the exact same pathway. (So they are likely also additive.)Its athttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1790953/

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2019, 09:34:27 pm
content: Quote from: cdev on January 08, 2019, 07:19:50 pmI have never written a paper on the subject, I'm an Electronics Engineer. I did however find a 2012 meta-analysis of antioxidant supplementation:https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD007176.pub2/abstractI have no doubt you have done "research" into the matter. But I'm unsure how you can be so certain of your conclusions when there doesn't seem to be much agreement about these matters in the medical community. The danger here is that you're talking about lots of different issues and trying to tie them altogether. We've gone from 5G - which expands the existing cell network bands, to "glutathione deficiency", to government agendas, to mentioning vague problems with biology or "multiple man-created toxicants". It is hard to know exactly what you are claiming, and really does look like a collection of conspiracy theories.No-one has claimed that anything is perfectly safe because it is extremely hard to make such a claim, but you have yet to prove to me that anything to do with 5G has or will harm people. In fact, the 5 years after 5G rolls out we'll see won't we?

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2019, 09:59:02 pm
content: Mechanisms for Health Effects of RF and ELF EMF: Dr. Frank Barnes, University of ColoradoEMF Synergistic Effects: Studies of World Trade Center First Responders: Dr. Udasin, Dr. Mellion,Dr. Marc Arazi "Phonegate" Cell Phone Radiation Tests of France Violate Safety LimitsSo why all this s**t isn't properly regulated? Perhaps can draw analogy:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflight_smokingQuoteSo yea,philosophicallypeople have rights... until there is market conflict.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 09, 2019, 10:31:45 pm
content: Buriedcode,I just had a thought. Have you ever heard of something called "priming" of the immune system, or immune system "adjuvants?".Its not quite the same as the 'hormesis' like phenomenon you describe.When does priming come into play? I first learned about it from the literature describing the conditions found in the aftermath of tornadoes and hurricanes, extreme weather which both creates an extreme level of highly toxinogenic mold, and also sewers overflow which covers the landscape with water contaminated heavily with human excrement, which is loaded with lipopolysaccharide or LPS.LPS or "endotoxin" is the standard of inflammation. Its the calibration point for inflammatory stimulating activity. Its also a powerful "adjuvant" in that because of how the immune system works (haptics, or shape of the toxicant triggers the future imune system response to it) LPS has a property of priming the immune system to in the future see as a threat anything that it encountered along with the LPS.This effect becomes very bad when the toxicant isnt rare enough to not be present frequently.A lot of things can cause immune system problems and those things tend to occur when people cant get away from them when their body starts saying no.This is called "atopy". Things that act as immune system adjuvants can sometimes be leveraged in useful ways, for example, when immunizing people against some pathogenic thing that we want the immune system to remember better, we might immunize the person with the thing we want the immune system to recognize plus some adjuvant along with it.BUT, when people are stuck in an environment where these adjuvants or adjuvants plus toxicants are together, they get really sick. Like 20 times more sick than they would if the adjuvant was not there and the toxicant was just by itself. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina this cascade of neuroinflammation caused a syndrome informally called "Katrina Brain" that turned out to be physiologically devastating to many skilled people professionally because it was a lot like chemotherapy's aftermath.The same issue is the talk of the towns now on the Jersey Shore. There its blamed on the mold which followed Hurricane Sandy. But its not just the mold, its the mold produced by conditions only found when wall cavity RH reaches close to 100%plus the LPSthat makes it so bad. Because of the immune system priming. (if people want references, try to find them first based on the phrases I'm using and if you cant, ask me in this thread and I'll post them. But they are technical.)And no I am not an expert or any kind of scientist. Just a voracious reader.Also, I don't know if RF acts in this way, but I suspect its a better analogy to what could be problematic than the one you used buriedcode, and also its a good example of why and how ROS modulated inflammation is leveraged by the body, as a kind of signal, by the body, which has evolved these mechanisms over millions of years because they usually work. They help people survive long enough to reproduce.Thanks for giving me your link, I'll check it out. So please check out the meaning of "priming" in the immune system context and "immune system adjuvant" and consider that increasing the noise level when such important things are at work as the immune system learning whats dangerous and what isn't could be important enough to all life to not be something we want to mess with over such a large potential area. In a way that impacts a lot of different other forms of life as well as ourselves. (Like birds who tend to spend more time higher up than we do and so would be exposed to more RF from a system thats line of sight and omnipresent. Because even if a beam is steered, after it reaches the receiver it doesn't stop, it keeps going and multiplied by zillions of other beams which also keep going, we may end up with so much RF in the air it becomes a huge problem.Its not the only one of these problems by any means. We're doing all sorts of things that are creating these big problems and they all add up to a potential health disaster on an unimaginable scale. Did you see how I just earlier mentioned two more of them, mold from extreme weather, and LPS from flooding events. Those two combine to yield20 timesthe inflammatory potential than either one alone.Similar intractable health problems were created after other environmental exposures that involved these immune system adjuvants and priming. One was the WTC disaster which it turned out was so problematic because the fire it created produced carbon nanotubes which are an immune system adjuvant (as well as a cause of mesothelioma) But the biggest problem for the first responders was the immune system chaos caused by the CNTs. Another example of an environmental disaster which caused this was the Gulf War which involved hydrocarbons at low level in the atmosphere. It also caused a complex health situation which we still do not understand but which we would be unwise to ignore the lessons from.All of these things need to be considered together and because they are most certainly going to become much greater than the sum of the parts, we absolutely need to avoid what we're doing now which has the feeling of some kind of gold rush or land rush to stake out claims in taking peoples health policy space before they wise up. Thats so very irresponsible. And people will eventually realize it if its done and becomes problematic like I suspect it all likely will.Also, we must not confound research which requires unexposed control groups who can inform research.There are a bunch of other similar problems we have not touched on. Another is endocrine disrupting chemicals, which are rapidly becoming a huge and very costly health problem, according to organizations that track this. They are caused by a bunch of highly useful and profitable chemicals which have the unfortunate ability to also mimic hormones. They already are costing hundreds of billions of Euros a year in the EU and probably even more in the US where up until now they have been less regulated. But the abysmal state of health care affordability in the US acts as a barrier to data collection because many Americans cant afford to get health care or postpone it until its too late for it to be of much use to them. But you can bet the impact of this problem is astronomical and getting worse over time in a way thats going to be very hard to address because of these chemicals persistence in the environment. EDCs are likely behind the rising incidence of a number of very costly and common cancers, as well as the metabolic syndrome. They also cause trans-generational morbid obesity. They also pose problems for human reproduction.There are a lot of additional things like this. Mercury is another. It also depletes glutathione. Nuclear accidents, not something we like to discuss here, also happen and we have to realize that they also could be thought of as an additional withdrawal from the bank of human resilience that corporations still expect to be able to make endless withdrawals from without any consequences. While at the same time, employing fewer and fewer human beings while doing it.And shedding responsibilities.When previously transnational corporations, like other businesses, purchased all risk insurance, now they rely on treaties to force taxpayers to indemnify them when governments are forced to act. Causing a paralysis, and a failure to govern.The intended chilling effect.The impacts of out of control deregulation with a ratchet clause attached is this gold rush like atmosphere where corporations try to snatch up.. this tangible thing, policy space, as fast and as quietly as they can..Its insanitybut its clearly being done, to pass the profits to them, but the costs to the taxpayers and communities.. Their takings therefore may go not just to steal ones health or ones children or neighbors health, thanks to new rules, the member of the public have to pay for each regulatory change (which must also be minimal, so no more new NHSs for security from costs which bankrupt more Americans than anything else, by far, no more new free college for some lucky young people, Never again, we're told, thats the old way. They are now forbidden as 'regulation" and all thats now allowed, except the very minimum is a one way street to deregulation, also as the taxpayer must pay, for whatever is done (or if a promise made in the past to deregulate is deemed broken by withdrawal from an agreement that includes it, even if it has not been done yet) there goes your retirement pension, your health insurance. Your child's or your own college education. Or even ones job.Quote from: Buriedcode on January 09, 2019, 09:34:27 pm

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 01:48:43 am
content: Oh shit...MrNut is back...It's like an infection of flat earthers.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 02:02:20 am
content: Cyberdragon.Regardless of how bad the risk would be with the current rotundity, (actually oblate spheroid) think about it, it might well be many orders of magnitude worseif the Earth was flat.The attached PDF has a wealth of references on RF and health issue. Check it out, it's worth reading.BTW, RF at levels found in our environmenthaverepeatedly been determined to be a human carcinogen under certain conditions. For example, for a long time its been known that people get rare brain cancers in substantially higher numbers - on the side of their brains they hold the phones, from heavy cell phone use.In the PDF the author also brings up that fact that simply using heat to determine safety levels is wrong as its ignoring a wealth of evidence that many issues are important."Safety testing for 5G is the same as other wireless devices. It is based on heat. Thisis an obsolete standard and not considering current science showing cellular andorganism harm from non-thermal effects. There is a large gap in safety data for 5Gbiological effects that has been demonstrated in older studies including military."New Recommendations to Protect Public Health:1) Do not proceed to roll out 5G technologies pending pre-market studies on health effects.2) Reevaluate safety standards based on long term as well as short term studies on biologicaleffects.3) Rescind a portion of Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 which preemptsstate and local government regulation for the placement, construction, and modification ofpersonal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects so that health andenvironmental issues can be addressed.4) Rescind portions of The Spectrum Act which was passed in 2012 as part of the Middle ClassTax Relief and Job Creation Act, which strips the ability city officials and local governments toregulate cellular communications equipment, provides no public notification or opportunity forpublic input and may potentially result in environmental impacts.5) Create an independent multidisciplinary scientific agency tasked with developing appropriatesafety regulations, premarket testing and research needs in a transparent environment with publicinput.6) Label pertinent EMF information on devices along with appropriate precautionary warnings."

author: GregDunn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 02:10:08 am
content: Hmmm... chemicals, chemicals, chemicals, chemicals, and electromagnetic waves. Which of these things is not like the others?

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 04:21:01 am
content: Corrolation != causation! The root of all this crap is bad statistics, and bad science (poor testing). Just like everything in California causes cancer. Don't worry, all electronics are already covered under that shit.I can find garbage research to support anything. The fact is there are plenty of articles that fail to show repeated results for these nonsensical claims. Please watch the science episode of the show Adam Ruins Everything, he discusses this rubbish scaremongering science, and how people these days are terrible at verifying results. An inconsistant result in a research study is a false. You can't prove it, doesn't exist.https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheetQuote

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 08:50:26 am
content: *.gov? Yawn... *.mil trumps .gov:https://apps.dtic.mil/docs/citations/ADA282886Quote

author: Buriedcode
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 05:55:15 pm
content: cdev, you clearly feel quite passionate about this, as I have stated, my position is "don't know, but things are probably safe". But I want to pick out one thing you saidQuote from: cdev on January 10, 2019, 02:02:20 amBy who? I don't mean to imply that absolutely every statement should be backed up with well conducted, peer-reviewed studies - often anecdotal evidence is what leads people to study things further - but to drop this in without anything to back it up just means those who believe this to be true already will think this is further evidence of it. And those of us who haven't seen any evidence of this (regardless of whether its true) will see it as purely assumption on your part, and makes you look paranoid.I'm not suggesting you are, just that issues like this tend to be very polarizing, so we'll end up with those who believe the above statement arguing against those who assume its wrong, and the whole thread will devolve into "where's the evidence?" vs "ahh! prove me wrong!".I could make a claim that because mortality rates ofcancer have been declining for the past 20 yearsthat cell phones actually reduce the incidence of cancer. But how could one prove or refute that when there are so many factors at play? Your claims, whilst seen benign can be dangerous because they are incredibly hard to substantiate or disprove. I understand erring on the side of caution, but its not simply "better safe than sorry" because there are real harms from spreading such fears, mostly being the continuing rise of quackery.Whilst the scientific method is very simple, actually teasing apart causality and myriad factors ishard. So hard in fact that many studies cannot be replicated, and the same dataset can show completely opposite results depending on the analysis. The quality of studies is decreasing, and now one can find almost anything on pubmed to substantiate their claims, often because studies don't have a strict definition of what they are looking for. And even include the results in the abstractLets start a fresh. Only one link in a post at a time - otherwise it puts people off and we'll never bother to read it. I don't believe cdev is a "nut" and labeling him as such helps no-one.edit: so many typos.. and missed out "mortality" in cancer mortality rates.

author: Cyberdragon
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 05:57:25 pm
content: Quote from: MrW0lf on January 10, 2019, 08:50:26 amAt what power level? The article I posted is about cellphones, IE low power coms. A military article would be referring to high power radar exposure. Again, with you conspiracy nuts not understanding power levels.

author: sainbablo
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 06:00:01 pm
content: "If you believe some contributors, 5G is a capitalist plot to enable panopticon surveillance, and to pollute our precious bodily fluids. Change "capitalist" into a different bogeyman, if that suits the agenda!"Scientific inventions are good and bad.Several decades ago in a book "impact of science on society" Bertrand Russell gave example of a wireless communication device and its uses being good as well bad.Those were HF and VHF devices.We have cell phones now operating in UHF milleu, held closed to body emitting thermal as well as audio vibrations.The newer devices have low thermal output but enough audible energy to cause TTS (temporary threshold shift) of hearing though reversible, and in some cases cochlear damage leading to permanent loss of hearing.And damage to normal histology of human tissues is an additional risk capable of causing carcinogenesis within tissues around ear and in brain.My point is that as it is, human body is totally immersed in an ocean of wide range of radiations, emitting energy ofvarious wavelengths, capable of altering the normal physiological functions of individual parts of human anatomy and in some cases producing pathological changes.So the question arises and it must be asked loudly that is, to what extent such biological side effects one must wait to suffer before calling "enough is enough".Any thoughts?

author: MrW0lf
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 06:58:34 pm
content: Quote from: Cyberdragon on January 10, 2019, 05:57:25 pmCellphone you can throw into garbage bin, it's not a problem. Problem is that they plan to blast 75dBm at ground level, up from current 62dBm and in more focused beams of SHF goodness. No wonderBoeing is worriedthat their 5G sat network wont physically make it thru. This kind of RF environment has been so far more common in military context so it makes much sense to tap into their research. In general they are more focused on objective research because otherwise operational capability would be compromised sooner or later.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 07:46:40 pm
content: Right below are the references to the studies I was referring to which were summarized inDrs Hardell and Carlbergs comments in the Intntl Journal of Oncologyon last year's NTP studies.I linked to that earlier. Did you read it?https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6254861Also, there is a summary of their findings in this PDF"Use of Wireless Phones and Evidence for Increased Risk of Brain Tumors" You should read it.Here are the citationsHardell L, Näsman A, Påhlson A, Hallquist A, Hansson Mild K. Use of cellular telephones and the risk for brain tumours: A case-control study. Int J Oncol. 1999;15:113–116.Hardell L, Mild KH, Carlberg M. Case-control study on the use of cellular and cordless phones and the risk for malignant brain tumours. Int J Radiat Biol. 2002;78:931–936. doi: 10.1080/09553000210158038.5. Hardell L, Hansson Mild K, Sandström M, Carlberg M, Hallquist A, Påhlson A. Vestibular schwannoma, tinnitus and cellular telephones. Neuroepidemiology. 2003;22:124–129. doi: 10.1159/000068745.Carlberg M, Hardell L. Evaluation of mobile phone and cordless phone use and glioma risk using the Bradford Hill viewpoints from 1965 on association or causation. BioMed Res Int. 2017;2017;92184867. Baan R, Grosse Y, Lauby-Secretan B, El Ghissassi F, Bouvard V, Benbrahim-Tallaa L, Guha N, Islami F, Galichet L. Carcinogenicity of radiofrequency electromagnetic fields. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:624–626. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(11)70147-4.8. IARC Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans. Vol. 102. International Agency for Research on Cancer Press; Lyon: 2013. July. 2018. Non-ionizing radiation, part 2: Radiofrequency electromagnetic fields.http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol102/mono102.pdf--------------Buriedcode, as you should be picking up, I'm trying to bring some attention to an important fact, this push for huge increase in RF which has not been determined to be unequivocally safe, is just one of a great many similar "takings" which are being made, globally, of whatever right people used to have to live a healthy life.Putting the opposite right, the right to take policy space for health and precaution by international agreements that do an end run around democracy, locking in all deregulation, its having the effect of a race to the bottom.As somebody who grew up in an earlier era when the US led in regulating harmful substances (pollution) its distressing to me to see us engaging in this trickery to try to push standards down.All I want is for us to have a safe and productive future, not live in a world of illness and catastrophe where there are no unexposed control groups and dozens of seriously dangerous pollutants and other forms of pollution that have functionally identical effect as chemicals - radiation is one, high levels of noise, which also produce ROS and cause constant stress hormone activation, which is known to cause a great many health problems and endocrine disrupting chemicals which build up in the environment, are another. Also, due to changes in how natural gas is sold (who gets it), we're likely going to be exposed to lots more air pollution from coal as export of natural gas to Asia ramps up. Its anticipated the rise in cost will cause a building boom in cities as neighborhoods of postwar multifamily housing are replaced by modern energy efficient condominiums selling for market rates. Having to move will be another taking impacting people who didn't plan on the extra expense. Other 'irreversible' changes will lead to large scale job losses.These takings impact our lives on a daily basis, imposing huge costs on people which also by means of the creation of new rights for corporations to sell them, create entitlements which its stated, prevent the dreams many have of establishing or preserving rights to healthcare as a human right.In order for data on health impacts to be collected, people need to get health care. But increasingly the poor wont be able to pay.Thats because they will be poor, but people who have been exposed to these things may also be discriminated against by means of AI mining GPS data, and that likely means their health insurance premiums will be impacted by the places they live, work and visit and whatever is near them.It seems that a relationship thats statistically significant (see the longer paper linked above) already may associate residence proximity to cell base stations with health to some extent.But, it will become possible to derive much more precise data in the future. You can bet that whatever can be used, will be used to exclude people who have higher risks from coverage by setting higher prices.What I am saying is, I suspect these things all will have costly health impacts and that people, not the takers, who are paying high prices for these takings already, in ways that are non-obvious to most of us now will likely be forced to pay more and more.Just as 'genelining' - the medical underwriting of health insurance by means of family data, is about to make a comeback also.Whether they acknowledge their danger or think they are harmless or not. It doesnt matter, AI will compute a price irregardless in a totally opaque manner, and if inputs to that system will be based on statistics that will be related to costs of illnesses, not any specific action levels. So what that means is causes people don't know about will still cost them if geographically related to their travels and dozens of other factors looking back as far as they can.Otherwise the system won't be as profitable and thats not allowed, the rules require deregulation.All of these tricks will be how the system is made more and more profitable.Quote from: Buriedcode on January 10, 2019, 05:55:15 pmAt the top of this post. Follow the links.

author: Red Squirrel
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 08:13:58 pm
content: That's the part of 5G that does worry me a bit, the goal is lot of "micro cells" and they will be low to the ground. All this RF energy cumulatively and constantly can't be good. Humans are terrible for coming up with a tech, and then only acknowledging decades later that yeah, that was a bad idea. Look at stuff like asbestos. It was in everything before. There was big money in it, so of course anyone that said it was dangerous was silenced. When the money gravy train started to die out, only then did they decide that it's dangerous, and now the big money is in removing it.I don't see what's wrong with 3G, we don't need more speed and the coverage is already good. What we need is less data caps. As long as they continue to have data caps there is absolutely no point in increasing speeds.

author: cdev
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: January 10, 2019, 10:21:16 pm
content: Thescope of what they are planningseems unprecedented. Base stations every 100-200 meters, everywhere.Also, the use case includes devices which will always be on which can last 10 years or more on one battery. (they likely will charge them off of the RF in the air)The thing is, many countries are being sold a bill of goods that 'ecommerce' will restore prosperity and jobs which are being lost in large numbers as we move into a post-industrial economy. But the fundamental truth about e-commerce is that it has a strongly negative impact on total employment and concentrates profits upward. All of the changes which are being contemplated are attempts to cut various costs and they all will adversely impact the health and economic stability of communities, trading good jobs for precarious ones at low wages. More and more end-users likely wont be able to afford to spend lots of money on new e-services. Nor will cellular companies find it worth their while to build out these networks into areas where people don't have the money for them.Nobody will want to pay money to want to know the spending habits of the poor. Also, at least in the US, the government has added the US program that maintains partially subsidized broadband access to rural communities to the WTO GPA commitments. That means that they are likely to be outsourced to companies from poorer countries and their workforces. That could be fairly devastating to some poor US communities because they are among the only decent jobs those communities have.