[TowerTalk] FCC RF Safety Regs Info Sept 1

[Tom Rauch]

Please don't take this as a flame Gary, but your claims are not 
accurate.

 While I can agree with regard to speed limits and guns, I must disagree
> when it comes to hams and rf.  Every time I see some newbie wanting to get
> on hf and stringing his dipole across the ceiling in the house because he
> "can't" put up outside antennas, I am just that much more disappointed in
> where our hobby has gone.  Many of these people are putting their ceiling
> dipoles right under someone else's floor, possibly within inches of
> someone's children.  Even if not, he is obviously disregarding the welfare
> of his own family and himself.

I worked on RF systems used in experiments in the effects of non-
ionizing radiation on tissues.

The only documented form of damage comes from heating. Even a 
kilowatt on 27 MHz concentrated in a small area, like a buttock or 
hand, has therapeutic effects rather than harmful effects.

The FDA actually approves use of RF energy as therapy for burns, 
lesions like bedsores, and other soft-tissue injuries.

One of the doctors I worked with was head of the national group of 
Physicians investigating the effects of EM fields on tissues, and 
was very clear in telling me the only potential danger is when RF 
fields are so intense they actually cause cell temperatures to rise.  
 
> By the way, there is far more evidence that says rf damages human
> tissue, than there is that says it doesn't.

The only study I'm aware of that alleged a link between cellular 
damage and exposure to non-ionizing EM fields turned out to have 
falsified data. The "scientist" involved in that study was forced to 
withdraw all the data, and the school he worked for had to pay-
back all the grant money.

This made the National news, but it was a small one day blurb. The 
San Franciscan Chronicle (if I recall correctly) broke the story. I 
think K3BU has the web address, or had it. 
     
Dr. Art  Pilla, from Mt. Sinai School of medicine, told me years 
before that story broke that the data was a hoax. It took the 
government years to react. 

> Fire away!  Asbestos in place.  However, I won't argue with you, just
> stating an opinion.  You have a right to yours, as I do mine.
> 
> Gary

You didn't offer "opinions". Here is what you said:

> By the way, there is far more evidence that says rf damages 
human
> tissue, than there is that says it doesn't.

So list some sources. Let's see a few.




73, Tom W8JI
w8ji@contesting.com

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