|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RMNC
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
|
 Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 12:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| You get a higher dose of radiation from your computer screen and lights looking at this post than you do from a microwave oven or cell phone. There has never been any conclusive proof that either is bad for you. Knee-jerk reactionary fear mongering at it's most idiotic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RMNC wrote: |
| You get a higher dose of radiation from your computer screen and lights looking at this post than you do from a microwave oven or cell phone. There has never been any conclusive proof that either is bad for you. Knee-jerk reactionary fear mongering at it's most idiotic. |
Don't be sad then if you start shooting blanks-
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a4VAKgj2MTKo&refer=europe
And there actually are quite a lot of studies to suggest you are the one jumping the gun, and that studie claiming cellphones are safe are outdated-
http://cellphoneuse.org/
"We must not repeat the situation we had with the relationship between smoking and lung cancer," Carpenter said.
Ronald Herberman, director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, said that most studies "claiming that there is no link between cell phones and brain tumors are outdated, had methodological concerns and did not include sufficient numbers of long-term cell phone users."
Many studies denying a link "defined regular cell phones as 'once a week,'" added Herberman.
The committee were shown several European studies, particularly surveys from Scandinavia -- where the cell phone was first developed -- which show that the radiation emitted by cell phones have definite biological consequences.
For example, a 2008 study by Swedish cancer specialist Lennart Hardell found that frequent cell phone users are twice as likely to develop a benign tumor on the auditory nerves of the ear most used with the handset, compared to the other ear.
In addition, a paper published this month by the Royal Society in London found that adolescents who start using cell phones before the age of 20 were five times more likely to develop brain cancer at the age of 29 than those who didn't use a cell phone.
Finally, your spasdic reaction to some harmless sharing of information (I did post a neutral/pro-microwave link as well) is actually exactly the type of behavior said to be triggered by excessive exposure to the type of radiation emitted by Wi-Fi, cellphones, microwave ovens, etc. Oh well, carry on then, obviously you don't have kids. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wishfullthinkng
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 4:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
I agree with RMNC. Please stop the fear-mongering. People should expend the energy they use worrying about nonsense that they can't control and put it towards things they can control.
First, please refer to this chart about the different levels of radiation you get from doing and being near certain things.
http://xkcd.com/radiation/
Second, I trust through your responses that you eat a completely balanced diet devoid of any junk/processed foods and sodas because if you're that worried about microwaves (see: Faraday cages) then you're in for quite a surprise when you find out how much faster and more efficiently crappy food and soda will murder you. But of course, I'm just assuming aren't I?
Edit: poor grammar |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wishfullthinkng wrote: |
I agree with RMNC. Please stop the fear-mongering. People should expend the energy they use worrying about nonsense that they can't control and put it towards things they can control.
First, please refer to this chart about the different levels of radiation you get from doing and being near certain things.
http://xkcd.com/radiation/
Second, I trust through your responses that you eat a completely balanced diet devoid of any junk/processed foods and sodas because if you're that worried about microwaves (see: Faraday cages) then you're in for quite a surprise when you find out how much faster and more efficiently crappy food and soda will murder you. But of course, I'm just assuming aren't I?
Edit: poor grammar |
Yeah, there wouldn't be much point in considering how much you ought to use a cellphone/microwave/Hi-Fi if you crammed your gut with junk.
By the way, the reason why I did include both sides to the microwave radiation debate in my links was to see what information we could get from both sides just to see what other people got on the topic. 
On the subject of studies, clearly there have been a few (if you're too afraid to consider evidence possibly linking cellphones, microwaves, etc to health probelms, look away from your monitor now)-
"The main problem isn�t cancer, although the industry would like you to believe that, because then they can pull out statistics showing how infrequently it occurs as a result of low-level radiation. Cancer takes a long time to develop. Typically, other problems show up first: neurological, reproductive, and cardiac. Problems with severe headaches, sleep disturbances, memory loss, learning disabilities, attention deficit disorder, and infertility show up long before cancer. When cancer does appear, it�s typically brain tumors, leukemia, and lymphoma.
Here are a few things to keep in mind about the health effects of microwave radiation:
1. Effects at low levels can be more noticeable than at higher levels.
The existence of a �window effect� is well documented, in which effects occur at certain frequencies and power densities but not at those immediately above or below them. However, it�s not as simple as just mapping these frequencies and power levels, because the local geomagnetic field and individual susceptibility also influence the result.
Following are a few examples of the nonlinear nature of the effects, from Arthur Firstenberg�s book Microwaving Our Planet (see bottom of page for information). In each case, emphasis has been added:
Firstenberg points out (p. 41) that �calcium ion efflux from brain tissue is extremely sensitive to irradiation with radiofrequency waves.� He cites four studies and a literature review. In particular, a 1986 study by Dutta et al. at 915 MHz and various exposure levels showed that �The effect at 0.0007 mW/g SAR [specific absorption rate] was quadruple the effect at 2.0 mW/g, in other words 3000 times the intensity had 4 times less of an effect under these particular conditions.� Looking at it the other way, an intensity three thousand times lower had an effect four times greater.
Firstenberg describes a number of studies on microwave radiation and blood cells. In one, �Chiang et al. (1989) in their epidemiological study found that white blood cell phagocytosis was stimulated by chronic exposure to the lowest intensities of radio waves and inhibited, sometimes severely, by higher intensities. . . . Exposure levels ranged from 0�4 mW/cm2 to 120 mW/cm2.� (p. 22)
In another study on blood, �These results were further refined by a 30-day experiment with guinea pigs at 1, 5, 10, and 50 mW/cm2 (Shandala and Vinogradov 1978). All these intensities increased complement in the blood and stimulated phagocytosis by neutrophils, but 1 mW/cm2 had the biggest effect, and 50 mW/cm2 the smallest effect.� (p. 23)
The September 2000 newsletter of the Cellular Phone Taskforce, No Place To Hide, reported on some studies presented at the June 2000 European Parliament meeting on mobile phones and health. In one presentation, Dr. Lebrecht von Klitzing, of the Medical University of Lubeck, Germany, said, �Some people become ill at power densities of less than 10 nanowatts/cm2. . . . Small children are very sensitive to these emitters, down to field densities of 1 nanowatt/cm2.�
Another article in the newsletter says that Dr. Leif Salford, of Lund University, Sweden, �had previously reported that short exposure to microwaves at 915 MHz damages the blood-brain barrier. . . . �The most remarkable observation in our studies,� said Salford [at the conference], �is the fact that SAR values lower than 1 mW/kg give rise to a more pronounced albumin leakage than higher SAR values. . . . The situation that the weakest fields, according to our findings, are the biologically most effective, poses a major problem.� �
2. Another effect independent of power level is resonance, which occurs at certain frequency ranges where the wavelength is near the size of a body part. An example is the 900 Mhz range, which has a wavelength of approximately one foot�a size that can cause resonance in a child�s head (because some of the radiation is absorbed, and the wavelength decreases). This intensifies the biological effect. Also, children�s skulls are thinner, so microwaves penetrate more easily. (Another problem is that children�s cells are dividing rapidly, which creates more chance for DNA damage. Their immune systems are not fully developed and can�t defend them against this.)
3. Pulsed radiation, used for some microwave signals, is more harmful at the cellular level than continuous-wave.
4. Studies are typically done for short exposure periods at higher intensities, because running studies longer costs more money. This allows the industry to claim that few studies have been done that show effects for long-term, low-level exposure and that �nonthermal� effects do not exist. But public health scientists point out that duration is also important, and long-term, low-level exposure can have equivalent effects."
They could be on to something, or it could all amount to a hill of beans; probably somewhere in the middle, as with a lot of things. But as the historical behavior of the tobacco industry shows, if there's a mess of money to be made, there isn't exactly an earnest push from captains of industry arm 'n arm with gov't friends to get all the information out there to the public in a timely manner, hence the potential usefulness of a public forum. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RMNC
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
Something tells me you crack a window when you sleep with the fan on  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legrande
Joined: 23 Nov 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 5:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| RMNC wrote: |
| Something tells me you crack a window when you sleep with the fan on |
Something tells me it's useless having a conversation with you |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nester Noodlemon
Joined: 16 Jan 2009
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| legrande wrote: |
| RMNC wrote: |
| Something tells me you crack a window when you sleep with the fan on |
Something tells me it's useless having a conversation with you |
Go put on your tinfoil hat. And, check under your bed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
murmanjake
Joined: 21 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Legrande, I read a bit of those articles and from what I gathered it seems that the worries lie in the way that the microwave alters the food it heats, not the waves escaping from the microwave and affecting your body.
These kinds of issues--think MSG, aspartame, the nuclear power plant in Japan--can be very polarizing. Labels are thrown around, and true discussion rarely takes place. Because who has the energy to wade through all the BS? Easier to just call someone a sheep, or a fear-mongerer.
Those motivated enough to actually do the research typically already have an agenda. The rest of us have too much else on our plates to go challenging a well-accepted mainstream reality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cyui
Joined: 10 Jan 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Know what this exactly about and your about 3 days' late.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RMNC
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 8:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Holy jebus, you do realize this is an ESL message board, right cyui? I don't even know where to start with that sentence. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cyui
Joined: 10 Jan 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| of course.. :lol: |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RMNC
Joined: 21 Jul 2010
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
Drinking on Monday night again? I'm disappointed in you!!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cyui
Joined: 10 Jan 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 21, 2011 9:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Nah.. :lol: |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
