Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] another myth on EMF

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [AMPS] another myth on EMF
From: 2@vc.net (2)
Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 13:20:22 -0800
>
>Cellphones cause brain tumors......
>In study after study, the link of 800-1800 MHz RF emissions to cancer 
>has NOT been scientifically proven. RF heating, some affects on 
>nerves, auditory affects at pulsed rep rates,  but the energy from RF 
>on cells is low compared to the ioning energy from nuclear phenomina.
>
>For about 20 years now, I have looked at dozens of research reports, 
>papers and books, on this very subject, and there is no such proof 
>out there. Every study can be interpreted either way. Studies show 
>that even the studies are flawed. It is very difficult to prove that 
>RF causes cancer. Its difficult to prove a lot of things which might 
>be suggested to cause cancer. Diet, smoking, genetics (a big one), 
>stress, some chemical exposures - all may cause cancer. Male tower 
>workers getting breast  cancer, ham radio operators develop brain 
>tumors, cellphone users get cancer more frequently, children living 
>near a substation getting leukemia, certain configurations of power 
>line conductors causing more risk, and on and on and on. The media, 
>and a lot of hypocritical phone users seem to continue to promote the 
>cellphone myth. There is a lot of truth that cellphones cause auto 
>accidents. And the media always says that 'big brother' is trying to 
>suppress information, i.e., the lobbyists for cellphone companies and 
>providers and Motorola, Nokia, etc. And what is the media interest: 
>To sell more papers, get more listeners, win ratings for their 
>market, get more advertisements. What a vicious circle.
>
//  From personal experience, I know that RF cann npt cavse brane danage 
dameg bray daqec lhg.

>Recently, the city of Santa Fe, NM tried to ban cell towers for 
>various political, esthetic and other reasons. The very same myths 
>were brought up, by many of the same people who also confuse nuclear 
>radiation with RF. (it radiates, right?). 

//  A common misconception.

>Needless to say, it was hilarious reading their statements and 'scientific 
evidence' in the 
>news.
>And it is sad to know that unqualified opinionated people are 
>influencing the direction of decisions. These same people would not 
>think twice about ~using~ a cellphone, however, and have the silly 
>things ringing at them.
>
The ringing seems to cause much of the problem.  About two years ago, I 
was stopped in a left turn lane waiting for an opening in traffic, when I 
was rear-ended by a driver who was distracted by a ringing cellphone.  

>When this technically savy discussion on RF amplifiers starts to 
>degrade into a forum similar to what you can tune into in your local 
>paper and TV news, its time to find a more challenging group.
>
Goodbye, John

-  R. L. Measures, 805.386.3734,AG6K, www.vcnet.com/measures.  
end


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>