Cell towers kill

108 posts / 0 new
Last post
Fidel

If you happen to notice any rooftop antennas exceeding safety code 6, and they don't have a sign that looks a lot like  [url=http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf05990.html#appendix1]one of these[/url], then you should report it to the authorities. Generally the smaller(older) the microwave dish is, the more dangerous to human health is the point to point directed microwave beam. By rights the area in front of them should be marked off with yellow paint as well as a proper sign nailing up.

D V

Fidel wrote:

If you happen to notice any rooftop antennas exceeding safety code 6, and they don't have a sign that looks a lot like  [url=http://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sf05990.html#appendix1]one of these[/url], then you should report it to the authorities. Generally the smaller(older) the microwave dish is, the more dangerous to human health is the point to point directed microwave beam. By rights the area in front of them should be marked off with yellow paint as well as a proper sign nailing up.

It'll be hard to catch excess of Code 6, a deliberately easy bar to keep under. Maybe some would appreciate some quotes from Brodeur's classic from way back in '77 already, here from one notorious Capt. Tyler on the establishment of our insane standards:

"[...] if standards "must be set now, then try for as high a level as possible," for the simple reason that "if adverse effects are determined in the future, it is far easier to lower the standards than to relax them". (pg 260)

 

In Toronto -- did I mention this already? -- top floor long-term tenants (some 15 & 25 yeras around) fled with microwave sickness a few months after commencement of operation of a pack of Bell & Wind antennae atop the roof. They are now unable to take much lower exposures without debilitating symtpoms, they are "EHS" I mention them because one tenant corroborated my hunch that the wrost offenders might be the 23 & 38 gHz directional antennae, from which there is always some scatter, deadly it seems at I think 0.1W max. output, way, way below Code 6. These frequencies I think are lumped together with the cellphone frequencies for "safety" limits, I thnk the lower power is more to save $. Anyway, there is a long-delayed landlord-tenant tribunal hearing related to this finally upcoming in Jan. If health effects at levels way lower than Code gets into the quiasi-judicial record, and it gets appealed either way, with the health effects accepted as unreasonable interference with tenants' enjoyement, or some such rubric, it could be of some moment vs telecoms & govt.

I must have pointed out in some of these related threads that there have been favourable court judgements against masts in at least Chile, Belgium, France, Tunisia, Greece, on constitutional to precautionary cases, & a high court in Italy upheld a labour tribunal award injury from occupational cell use.

 

I remember some other quotes from Brodeur I have around, since the cataracts were mentioned, I hope a longish post is not against rules here, some will find it interesting:

"The pattern of microwave cover-up is unmistakable. And so is the reason that the federal government, the military, the vast electronics industry, and all of the academic and research institutions financed by the military-electronics industry complex have been standing on their collective head to avoid conducting meaningful epidemiological studies of the health hazards posed by microwave radiation. People in the military-electronics industry complex don't want to know the extent of the problem. If they knew about it, they might have to admit they knew about it, and then might even have to do something about it, which would cost a lot of money both in terms of litigation and preventive measures. This is not to say, of course, that people in the government and in the military-electronics industry complex don't know a lot already about the microwave hazard [this is 1977]. For twenty years, in order to enlarge their arsenals and enhance their profits, they have engaged in a massive cover-up of a whole spectrum of microwave biological effects, hoodwinking the Congress and the American people. "

"In light of what is now known about the biological effects of microwave radiation, Dr. McLaughlin's observations in the so-called California case in 1954, together with the eminently sensible recommendations he made in 1962, fairly take one's breath away [he expressed the need for great caution, incorporating differences in frequencies, body parts, time periods, cumulative absorption, penetration, etc. vs treating the body and the spectrum mostly as undifferentiated lumps]. What happened, then, as a result of these observations and recommendations? Nothing. Why? Dr. McLaughlin's fellow physicians and scientists---both military and civilian---decided at the time of the first Tri-Service Program that the California case could be dismissed either as unproved or as involving gross heating of the hollow viscera, and that Professor Schwann's whole-body heat dissipation theory and the ten-milliwatt standard would take care of everything.

In arriving at this decision, the medical and scientific community was encouraged mightily by the military and electronics industry, who were only too glad to be rid of McLaughlin's troublesome conclusions. They hastened to get on with the four-year Tri-Service Program that would validate the ten-milliwatt standard, which, in turn, would allow the proliferation of microwave devices to proceed unimpeded. Nonetheless, McLaughlin's work had to be discounted. And so, at meeting after meeting, it was discounted as being scientifically invalid, irrelevant, and poorly rationalized. Indeed, such criticism was repeated so often and at so many meetings that by the middle of the 1960s, a whole new generation of microwave scientists---totally financed by the military-electronics industry complex and marching in intellectual lockstep---simply passed on the belief that McLaughlin's work was invalid, like acolytes who automatically chant the litany of orthodoxy.

What happened to Dr. McLaughlin also happened, of course, to Dr. Zaret [re cataract formation & exposure &c]. And in this manner were two early prophets of the biological hazards of microwaves neutralized by the military-electronics industry complex. They had dared to suggest that microwaves---the radiation that the military conceived of as indispensable to the national security, and that the electronics industry conceived of as travelling at the speed of light in a straight line to immense corporate profits---might be hazardous to human health.

It is important to examine the long-range consequences of such a policy of suppression [indeed, here we are]. [...] the often repeated claim of the military-electronics industry complex that the biological consequences of such exposure have no bearing upon possible health hazards for the general public is totally without foundation.

The consequences of heavy exposure to any agent that poses a health hazard should be taken by an enlightened society as a warning that there may well be a need for preventive measures at much lower levels."

"Clemenceau once said that war was too serious a matter to be entrusted to the military [said after Brodeur's many-page rehearsal of deception, obfuscation and manipulation by them], and certainly the public health is. While no one should question that it may be necessary for the Department of Defense to dissemble when it comes to developing secret weapons, no one should assume that the department will at the same time undertake scientific research designed to protect Americans from microwave damage. In order to protect their health and well-being, citizens of a constitutional democracy obviously have either to be informed, or to inform themselves about health hazards, for only when the people are informed about the hazards can they insist that protective measures be taken. This has been true of DDT, asbestos [where Brodeur was a particularly leading writer as well], vinyl chloride, aerosol propellants, and a host of other harmful substances and toxic chemicals, and it is equally true, of course, of an insidious, tissue-penetrating agent such as electromagnetic radiation." (pg 280)

What about political protection?

"Thanks to the dumbfounding deference to the Department of Defense, the military was given a free hand to continue its cover-up of the health hazards posed by microwave radiation to the general population. The Congress---supposed protector of the people---in this whole affair resembles a hooded bird tethered to the wrist of a falconer. Every once in a while, the bird flaps its wings; occasionally it is unhooded; and every so often it is allowed to fly off and snare a pigeon. Most of the time, however, the bird is content to roost quietly upon the falconer's wrist. The falconer---the military-industrial complex that Eisenhower warned the nation about nearly twenty years ago [I think that famous phrase was originally said to conjoin "congressional" to that couplet, but was dropped so as not to ruffle feathers, so to speak]---has by this time largely tamed the Congress, and he is a falconer who now bids fair to rule this land." (pg 249)

 

 

The book is the masterwork result of investigative journalism in the public interest. It generated rather much general media interest: "Since December 1977 no part of the media has failed to get involved" (Steneck, The Microwave Debate, '85, pg 192). "The book was said to have "become the touchstone for a growing body of scientists and environmentalists concerned about the effects of 'electronic smog'" (ibid). "That the microwave debate had taken off largely as a result of mass media activity cannot be denied. [time to go for it again, CBC pitching in some so far] In case after case of public protest over some proposed RF project or problem, the cause of public concern can be traced to information presented by the mass media. Insofar as coverage of the RF bioeffects story in the late 1970s was deeply influenced by The Zapping of America, the trail of public concern can ultimately be traced to Paul Brodeur." (pg 194)

[after Brodeur's enormous list of microwave & other electronic dependencies back already in '77:]
"No wonder that as far back as 1971 the Electromagnetic Radiation Management Advisory Council of the President's Office of Telecommunications Policy warned that "power levels in and around American cities, airports, military installations and tracking centers, ships and pleasure craft, industry and homes may already be biologically significant" and that the population at risk "may well be the entire population". No wonder, considering the very real possibility that the health consequences of microwave radiation exposure may be cumulative, that the council also warned that "the consequences of undervaluing or misjudging the biological effects of long-term, low-level exposure could become a critical problem for the public health, especially if genetic effects are involved".

"It should be abundantly clear by now that, in spite of the denials and claims to the contrary that flow from the military-electronics industrial complex, the microwave and radio-frequency radiating problem is not a limited threat. Indeed, the microwave radiation problem affects virtually every man, woman, and child in the land. In fact, the microwave problem is nothing less than the zapping of America."

The Zapping of America: Microwaves, Their Deadly Risk, and their Cover-Up, Paul Brodeur, 1977

 

Fidel

D V wrote:
It'll be hard to catch excess of Code 6, a deliberately easy bar to keep under.

Yes. I worked at a place about 30 minutes from Ottawa in the 1990s. The whole town was receiving cable internet and telephony over CATV using cable boxes supplied by the small r&d company I worked for. There was a microwave dish within code 6 regs on the flat roof about two stories up. The roof is probably climbable by some of the more athletic locals. We had to put up a warning sign and put barriers around the thing so no one could stand in front of it without ignoring a whole lot of colourful sign and section of the roof painted in black and yellow stripes. There was a sports bar across the street, and I sometimes wondered if the idiots would every try climbing the building for kicks. It never happened. It was a greate place to soak in the sun and gather your thoughts though.

D V

"Antennes relais cellulaires: les preuves d'effets biologiques s'accumulent"

http://www.cyberpresse.ca/le-soleil/actualites/science-et-technologie/20...

polly bee

Jingles wrote:

Quote:
 I applaud those parents for standing up for their children.

Child services should be called in to protect these kids from stupid parents. 

 

Seems a bit over the top, but hey, whatever floats your boat.  It would be awesome to be such a perfect parent that you can pass judgement like that.

remind remind's picture

Ya, I agree with ya pollyb, such comments are actually indicative of  much and none of it good.

Sineed

They're radio waves.

Noah_Scape

My favorite quip on this issue is that when brain cancers occur in cell phone users the tumours are on the side of the head the phone is held to "80% of the time". {sorry, I cannot find the link right now}

 

But let us not forget about the BEES!! Quote:

  "A study from Landau University in Germany suggests that the navigational capabilities of honeybees may be adversely affected by radiation from cell phones. 

    Let us hope Einstein was wrong in his prediction, "If the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe, then man would only have four years of life left."

 

Fidel

Sineed wrote:
They're radio waves.

Yes. And cell phones use a part of the spectrum that's within the microwave range. You create microwave energy when sending voice signals from a cell phone antenna.

In addiction, the  cell phone's battery produces a low frequency EM field associated with surges of electric current from the battery ie, to due with electric and magnetic components of the current from the battery and nothing to do with microwave energy.

D V

Sineed wrote:

They're radio waves.

You mean, only that?

If you do, just one example, Louis Slesin, the long-time lead journalist on these issues through his microwavenews.com, is reported to have said, cell phone towers will sicken you, but FM kills. A major Swiss study, maybe I mentioned, was important to even Toronto's prudent avoidance policy from the 90s (just after the study; I learned this from the guy who crafted the policy). Why they deduce effects from one to the other is a good question, the modulation pattern differs. And there was plenty around to damn pulsed microwave exposures already, see some of the quotes I brought already. It really is as clear as day to anyone even a layperson who looks into the history & studies at all. It is gigantic travesty, all the bad stuff imaginable wrapped into one ball, seizure of process, corruption of science, profiting off sickness, military proliferation, you name it. You know, unless there is quickly increasing mass public awareness raised, we are in big trouble.

Did I say here once before, I heard a leftist of very long experience say, Lenin is supposed to have said, socialism plus electricity = communism. After what I have learned in more than a year of research after close encounter with someone obviously stricken from involuntary micorowave expoures, and this all involves low & very low frequency stuff, like what's coming down the powerlines & into homes, which is why I bring that Lenin line; after all the research, retired pioneer epidemiologist in the field Sam Milham's words must be heeded, from his recent memoirs, Dirty Electricity: Electrification and the Diseases of Civilization,
.........
"The explosive recent increase in radio frequency and high frequency voltage transient sources, especially in urban areas from cell phones and towers, terrestrial antennas, Wi-Fi and Wi-Max systems, broadband Internet over power lines, and personal electronic equipment, suggests that unlike the twentieth century EMF epidemic, we may already have a twenty-firstcentury epidemic of morbidity and mortality underway, caused by high frequency electromagnetic fields. The good news is that many of these EMF diseases may be preventable by simple environmental manipulation, if society chooses to pay attention. Unless public outrage intervenes, I'm afraid that our "diseases of civilization" will only get worse. Good science alone is never enough to force sensible public policy. Only citizens can do that."
.........

 

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

Jingles wrote:

Quote:
Insomnia is now a mass phenomenon

From the bizarre grab bag of symptoms you're throwing up here, it is clear that cell towers do have one demonstrable effect: it disrupts and destroys peoples' bullshit detectors. Do you have a source for that insomnia claim?

I see too that microwave radiation hasn't affected your ability to make ad hominem attacks or to attribute wildly inaccurate beliefs to those whom doubt your fantastical claims.

BTW, just to clarify something: most cellular frequencies are not in the microwave band. They are UHF. 

Also, wifi occupies the same frequency bands as cordless phones.

What I think is driving all this mass hysteria moral panic is the fact that in most peoples' limited understanding, radio transmission is akin to magic. I see no difference between the cellular panics or witchcraft accusations. In both cases, cause and effect are grossly misunderstood, and an easy, visible target is blamed. It is rather funny to see such and ancient practice carried on into the age of the iPhone.

From an RF engineering point of view any transmitter with an operating frequency above 1 GHz. is generally considered to be "microwave"...but you're right, at 1 GHz. the wavelengths are really not that small...around 30 cm.   Microwave ovens I understand operate on a frequency of around 2.45 GHz. a little bit above wifi routers and certain...now getting a bit older cordless phones.

Of course in a microwave oven, the rf is encased in a faraday cage to zap your grub.

In any case, I'm not particularly concerned about relatively low powered radio towers as the transmitting antennas are usually up quite high and out of the way.   OTOH, the handsets are a bit more of a concern IMHO....but not just "cellphones" ... any radio transmitter with an operating frequency that's above say 400 MHz. or so.   Alot of "walkie-talkies" operate in and around the 400 MHz. range with an output power of 3-5 watts when you key up the transmitter.

 

D V

radiorahim wrote:

 

In any case, I'm not particularly concerned about relatively low powered radio towers

 

 

How could this poster say that after reading Levitt & Lai? Or Eger? Or the Belo Horizonte study mentioned? Or the whole history of it, as told from Brodeur to Maisch? How? What is "low"? In comparison to background radiation? Watch the adjectives...

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

DV, it's become pretty obvious that you really don't have a clue about even the basics of radio communications.

D V

I've had that useless remark tossed out in self-defence so many times, it's silly already

what in my questions would prompt such a response from you?

why not answer the questions?

if background radiation pre-synthetic xenobiotic radio communications is zillions of times lower

(yes, i am using that quantification provocatively, but don't get distracted), whence yor confidence using

the term , 'low'?

i won't (yet) say that you "don't have a clue" about bioeffects...

 

[edited because of this troublesome rabble text editor]

 

 

 

 

 

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

D V wrote:

I've had that useless remark tossed out in self-defence so many times.

Gee, I wonder why?

 

 

 

 

 

 

D V

Well, that's really helpful, radio'.  Would you be so kind as to point out just what defective in what I have written that led you speak as you do?

 

If your name betrays your occupation, don't feel much blame at all, not much more than any of us do for acquiescing all these decades, that you have been part of making people sick and worse (not to mention animals & vegetation, as in general biological degradation). There have been lies,obfuscation and info-hiding that attentuate blame.

Fidel

radiorahim wrote:

DV, it's become pretty obvious that you really don't have a clue about even the basics of radio communications.

Do we really have to whip out our resumes here? I've worked in IT in the same area we're talkin' aboot here in this thread. test eng. side of things. And I can say for certain that very, very few of us had a clue as to what "blood-brain barrier" means or very much at all concerning EM field effects on DNA of human brain cells. Ummm? Nope, I don't remember testing any of that stuff in the DV labs back in the nineties or start of the 2000s.

Fidel

DV? hmmm? Design verification by any chance?

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

If the RF managed to give the neighbourhood raccoons a headache and kept them from moving into my roof from time to time I'd be quite happy.   Unfortunately, not so.

Fidel

[url=http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/business/14digi.html?_r=1&src=busln]Sh... You Be Snuggling With Your Cellphone?[/url]

NY Times wrote:
Henry Lai, a research professor in the bioengineering department at the University of Washington, began laboratory radiation studies in 1980 and found that rats exposed to radiofrequency radiation had damaged brain DNA. He maintains a database that holds 400 scientific papers on possible biological effects of radiation from wireless communication. He found that 28 percent of studies with cellphone industry funding showed some sort of effect, while 67 percent of studies without such funding did so. “That’s not trivial,” he said.

Not trivial!

NY Times wrote:
Ms. Davis, citing unsettling findings from research in Israel, France, Sweden and Finland, said, “I do think I’m looking at an epidemic in slow motion.”

Would cell phone companies lose their mojo if there was a ban on cell phones?

Buddy Kat

radiorahim wrote:

If the RF managed to give the neighbourhood raccoons a headache and kept them from moving into my roof from time to time I'd be quite happy.   Unfortunately, not so.

Ha ..They are probably seeking protection , shielding from the microwaves. Another thing microwave or vhf radiation can cause is blood clots…do a search on the net “microwave radiation blood clots” and knock yourself out. Of course there are many spin off conditions from blood clots …like heart attacks and strokes. I would imagine animals would be even more susceptible to this.

 

Todays microwave techs should be totally aware of this factor. At least I had to do labs based on rf radiation field strength related to antenna distance, for that purpose. Could be the cellular industry has it’s paws in the education system now and they frown on such tests. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkM5eyN8ytI&feature=user

D V

Spanish biologist Balmori did Faraday cage experiment recently (the sci. from independent, non-industry-connected, sources gets clearer & stronger every day despite starvation for $), tadpoles 90% dead & listless unprotected at regular urban distance fro cell masts, caged just fine.

A fellow Cdn. activist posted the paper at http://citizensforsafetechnology.org/uploads/balmori_city_as_lab1.pdf .

At HESA Apr 29, summary of biophysicist Panagopoulos'testimony:

.............
Dr. Dimitris Panagopoulos:
Hello. Thanks for inviting me.

I shall try to describe, within a few lines, 10 basic conclusions from our experimental and theoretical work at the University of Athens over the last 11 years on the biological effects of mobile telephony radiation.

Conclusion number one is that GSM radiation at 900 and 1,800 megahertz, from mobile phone handsets, is found to reduce insect reproduction by up to 60%. The insects were exposed for six minutes daily during the first five days of their adult lives. Both males and females were found to be affected.

Second, the reduction of insect reproductive capacity was found to be due to cell death induction in reproductive cells. In the papers distributed to the committee members, we can see pictures of eggs from insects. In the first picture, we see eggs from a non-exposed insect. In the second picture, we see eggs from an insect exposed to radiation from a mobile phone handset. We can see the characteristic fluorescence denoting DNA fragmentation and cell death. You have more pictures like this.

Third, the effect of short-term exposure is evident at radiation intensities down to one microwatt per square centimetre. This radiation intensity is found at a distance of about one metre from a cellphone or 100 metres from a corresponding base station antenna. This radiation intensity is 450 times and 900 times lower than the limits set by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, ICNIRP, at 900 and 1,800 megahertz, respectively.

It is possible that for long-term exposure durations of weeks or months or years, the effect would be evident at even longer distances or at even lower intensities. For this, a safety factor should be introduced in the above value, of one microwatt per square centimetre. By introducing a safety factor of 10, the above value becomes 0.1 microwatts per square centimetre, which is the limit proposed by the BioInitiative Report.

Fourth, the effect is strongest for intensities higher than 200 microwatts per square centimetre; this is when we have a cellphone very close to our heads. Within that so-called window, around the intensity value of 10 microwatts per square centimetre, the effect becomes even stronger. This intensity value of 10 microwatts per square centimetre corresponds to a distance of about 20 to 30 centimetres from a mobile phone handset or 20 to 30 metres from a base station antenna.

Fifth, the effect increases with increasing daily duration of exposure in terms of short-term exposures of one minute to 21 minutes daily.

Sixth, the effect is non-thermal. There are no temperature increases during the exposures.

Seventh, the effect at the cellular level is most likely due to the irregular gating of ion channels on cell membranes, which is caused by the electromagnetic fields. This leads to disruption of the cell's electrochemical balance and function. This mechanism is a non-thermal one.

Eighth, although we cannot simply extrapolate the above results from insects to humans, similar effects on humans cannot be excluded. On the contrary, they are possible, first because insects are, in general, much more resistant to radiation than mammals, and second, because the presented findings are in agreement with the results of other experimenters who are reporting DNA damage in mammalian cells or mammalian and human infertility. There are many references for these findings in papers also distributed to the committee.

+ -(0930)

Ninth, reported observations during the last years regarding the diminishing of insect populations, especially bees, can be explained by a decrease in their reproductive capacity, as I described.

Our tenth and last conclusion is that symptoms referred to as "microwave syndrome", like headaches, sleep disturbances, fatigue, etc., among people residing around base station antennas, can possibly be explained by cellular stress induction on brain cells or even cell death induction on a number of brain cells.

Thank you for your attention.

 

.............

 

So, 'rahim can ignore good sense and do in his raccoons, and ignore my questions while he's at it, but why eliminate the food chain from the bottom up by doing in insects?

 

There's much more (esp. on bees). It'll never get past the weight of evidence bar, because of all the $ & muscle weighing on the other side.

 

This is really shaping up tyo be a "unifying theory", as it were, misuse of EM, frequencies high to low, behind a panoply of 20th century ailments -- do we let it get to 1 in 2 with cancer, 1 in 2 dementia?

Is it trending that way in childhood autism, too, Heaven help us?

Snert Snert's picture

Quote:
 It'll never get past the weight of evidence bar, because of all the $ & muscle weighing on the other side.

 

But how can you so cheerfully differentiate that from not getting past the weight of evidence because evidence is either missing or insufficient?

 

What you're saying sounds like "There's NO global warming, but you'll never get to hear that because Al Gore and his people won't let you".

 

I mean, that, or maybe we won't hear it because there IS in fact global warming.

 

You seem to be saying "You'll just have to trust this because shady, conspiratorial entities are PREVENTING me from supporting my claim". How convincing is that supposed to be?

D V

THat's the farthest thing from what I am saying! I have provided links to studies, words from active scientists, quotes from journalist-historians, reference to anecdotes galore. One has to look into it oneself, because the mainstream sci. & regulatory apparatus has been so corrupted, for cultural and grosser reasons. Just look at Devra Davis' new book, Disconnect, and she is mild, the book is praiseworthy for naming villains and quoting principal protagonists, like Frey & Gandhi, research eminences decrying the corruption. It is so plain & obvious to anyone looking into it.

Give me an angle, and I'll direct you to some evidence. Here maybe a quote or two from Davis (she's in Ontario late Nov. on a tour; yet I am strongly against her mildness and omission of the daming infrastructure sci. from the story, as if the technology can be salvaged on such horrific foundations):

 

............

In 1997, an important paper by Motorola-supported scientist Jerry Phillips appeared [...[showing that genes of rodents exposed to cell-phone-like radiation looked significantly worse than those [unexposed]. After his study had gone through review and been accepted, the published paper appeared. But it ended with a mysterious sentence that Phillips did not write, did not agree with, and had refused to include. That added sentence said that the change in gene expression following cell phone irradiation "is probably of no consequence".

[...] By the time his paper appeared with its orphaned final sentence, Phillips no longer worked for Motorola and lost his funding from Defense Department-associated sources as well."

..............

..............:

[...]Lin, an ICNIRP member, had produced a number of papers appearing to refute Frey's work on the ability of pulsed microwave radiation to induce sounds inn the brain. [...] Lin's critiques ignore Frey's primary paper [..] in Science magazine in 1979. Using holography, an exquisitely sensitive technique that does not destroy tissue, Frey found that microwave pulses do not create motion on soft tissue. Lin's studies finding a signal on the auditory nerve resulted from an experimental artifact. The tiny electrode assembly he used to "detect sound" actually produced it. When Frey invented and patented (for the Office of Naval Research) a special, nonintrusive electrode, he was able to show that the creation of sound in the brain does result from the low-intensity microwave signals, quite like those released by cell phones today.
In his most recent critique of Frey, Lin ignores Frey's Science paper completely. Instead, he cites five of Frey's other papers, giving the appearance of thoroughness. Frey comments on this highly selective reading of his work: "This sort of thing has always been done by the ‘no hazard establishment people' since the beginning, and has misled scientists and the public...."
Frey recalls that some of the studies purporting to show that Frey's work on the blood-brain barrier were wrong, did no such thing. "One group claimed to repeat our studies and find nothing. But instead of injecting a fluorescent dye into the artery where it could circulate like I did, they injected it into the abdomen, waited five minutes, killed the animals, and found no evidence that the dye had reached the brain. Of course not."

Snert Snert's picture

So are you saying that the "money & muscle" from "the other side" is the real reason that the things you've posted about are unable to sway the scientific community, or no?

Because there could be two reasons why my Unified Theory of Human Levitation doesn't seem to be taking the scientific world by storm.

One is that shady, un-nameable powers, concerned with their own interests, are suppressing the awesome truth of Human Levitation!

The other is that perhaps there's really just nothing demonstrating that humans can levitate. 

If I really, really want to believe that I can levitate (a la Yogic Flying, perhaps) then understandably I'll be far more satisfied believing that the Man is keeping me down than I will be in believing that my beliefs just don't hold water.

al-Qa'bong

Think of the opportunity we missed in 1993 by not electing the Natural Law Party.

 

They could have legislated yogic flying, thus ending the need for automobiles and aeroplanes, drastically reducing our need for fossil fuels, which would have in turn reduced the greenhouse gasses that cause global warming. 

 

9-11 may not have happened either, since it ain't easy to bring down a yogic flyer with a box-cutter.

D V

Well, Snert, do your comments deserve a reply? Show all the 1000s (yes, that many) sci. papers for levitatio theory, then we cn talk, maybe.

D V

Hey, al-Qa'bong, how did you find out about them boxcutters, eh? Them reported multiple cellphone calls from doomed non-yogic-flyers, right?

Big problem: them calls were not possible from said altitudes at the time. Now what do you think of that. Even the FBI has backed away from the ludicrous.

al-Qa'bong

Maybe aliens made the calls.

D V

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Maybe aliens made the calls.

 

Same as for snert, al', we'll need a few 1000 alien phone studies.

What is out there are call fabrication methods, showing fake phone # & doing voice simulation.

I think the FBI now says that 1, instead of some 20 I think it was calls, was made, for zero seconds.

 

But, you know, that vague association of danger & "security' & connexion to loved ones via cell phones, that was well-advertised on Sept 11, eh? Npw that is the last recourse for defenders o the indefensible, what'll ya do in an emergency...9-1-1, 9-1-1, 9/11, 9/11...

Fidel

Snert wrote:
What you're saying sounds like "There's NO global warming, but you'll never get to hear that because Al Gore and his people won't let you".

The people who gave us the 9/11 Commish Cover-up of a 30 year-old crime in Afghanistan are the same people who gave Americans government sponsored climate science denialism in the 2000s.

It was the same two pro war, pro big business parties that monopolized Congress and produced this dregulashun mess since Raygun through Clinton and wreaking havoc in banking and finance and adversely affecting most western world economies today.

And they are, by wild coincidence, the exact same two parties that produced telecom dregulashun since 1996. They've made it illegal in the US for towns and cities to reject cell phone masts based on anything other than aesthetics relating to property values.

And our stooges in the CRTC are basically all rubber stamps for telcos and cellular providers here where they are charging the shit out of Canadians for their crappy cell phone services.

D V

Well, we were happy that the CRTC said no to foreign-owned Orascom-Globalive-Wind, they had installed around a year ago at 200m from us, before we were 400 & 800m away from offending masts, but Wind kept testing all the way through the CRTC refusal and Harperite overruling the refusal.So I worry not about what telecomonsters charge, let it reflect health costs and tax it to the hilt (see e.g. item 16 at http://errantenergy.blogspot.com/ ). So now Wind has umpteen customers, and traffic is higher so our yard irradiated like never before has deformed vegetation ( Eg I can show you photos of a Norway maple, resplendent fori ts prior est. two decades, now leafless, starting this spring, only on the side facing the mast at around 180m.)

More related to the story starting this thread, see esp. comments by deever athttp://www.skepticnorth.com/2010/11/levitt-and-lai-peddling-discredited-... , the fight before HESA is heating up.

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

Now we get to the crux of the matter...you don't like the look of the cell tower in your neighbourhood.

You see, I want there to be lots and lots of cell towers preferably with some very high gain receiving antennas.

Why?

I want my cellphone to be heard by that cell tower with me putting out as little RF power as possible on my handset.   I don't want to "need" 750 milliwatts or a watt to hit that tower...I want to be able to hit it with say 100 or maybe even as little as 50 milliwatts.

Why?

I've said already that my problem is with the handsets...not the towers.   I am concerned about RF that's a couple of inches from your head.   That's not a good idea in my books.

So if that handset is running only 50-100 milliwatts...that's much better than it running a full watt of RF output.

Secondly, if my handset only needs to put out 50-100 milliwatts, I'm going to get much longer life out of my cellphone battery.    The less output power, the more battery life.    That's good for the environment.

But DV, you just don't like the "look" of cell towers...and come up with all kinds of conspiratorial crap about the alleged health effects of something that's a hundred or so feet in the air, and hundreds of feet away from you putting out 5 or 10 watts.

Fidel

I think cellular and PDAs and wifis are shitty tech and I just won't buy one. I tried it once and nearly sprained my thumbs doing keys on the miniature keypad. Call me a techno Luddite, I think I'd rather have a mobile for extreme emergencies and nothing more. I think they are incompatible with human health. They should be banned in schools and marketing to kids declared off limits.

D V

radiorahim wrote:

But DV, you just don't like the "look" of cell towers

Npt being a regular contributor here, I can't tell if this guy is serious.

Anyway, you lose both ways, as eg rural residents in Sweden were found to, their health before the cell phone mania predictably better than

urbanites', situation reversed thereafter, only ascertainably diff. their relative distance from base stations, so need for higher output from

devices by their heads & other body parts. But nearer field and father field dangers are dissimilar. See also, "1997 -  A Curious Year in Sweden".

Jingles

You'll never convince a true believer, R.R. 

The magic of the invisible trumps anything you can say.

Their magic is strong.

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

D V wrote:

 

r. See also, "1997 -  A Curious Year in Sweden".

I did...and it proves exactly nothing.   It suggests a possible link between the introduction of digital television transmitters and GSM phones in 1997 with rising rates of a whole host of diseases and simply suggests further investigation.

You know what?   1997 was also a year of record unemployment in Sweden... 10.6% as a matter of fact.   Unemployment has been linked to rises in all kinds of diseases and social stresses.

 

Fidel

Jingles wrote:
The magic of the invisible trumps anything you can say.

Isn't gravity also invisible?

And wasn't Galileo hauled to Rome a few times for speaking and writing about mysterious invisible forces he referred to as gravitas and levitas?

Jingles wrote:
Their magic is strong.

Yeah there's no better science like the reams of studies funded by cell phone companies, some of which actually report negative side effects from cell phone radiation.

And all those other publicly funded scientists around the world are heretics who should be racked for their heresies. We know.

If it's no corporate science, it's crrrrap!

D V

Jingles wrote:

You'll never convince a true believer, R.R. 

The magic of the invisible trumps anything you can say.

Their magic is strong.

that's neat, jingles, but which is witch? first i'm on the side of witchcraft accusery, then am a proferror of magic myself

 

D V

radiorahim wrote:

D V wrote:

 

r. See also, "1997 -  A Curious Year in Sweden".

I did...and it proves exactly nothing.   It suggests a possible link between the introduction of digital television transmitters and GSM phones in 1997 with rising rates of a whole host of diseases and simply suggests further investigation.

You know what?   1997 was also a year of record unemployment in Sweden... 10.6% as a matter of fact.   Unemployment has been linked to rises in all kinds of diseases and social stresses.

 

 

interesting observation about '97 if true, rr, but this is one of very many like items, like comparable Ont. inexorable rising health care costs since late 90s & after plateauing for some years finally, US study finding re their rise not attributable to equipment or aging ,now might  be overlay of factors, of course

 

see eg early EHS (surgeon had to quit, speculates about handheld electronic suturing device slowly electrocuting him, as it were -- Dr Maschi in France in '60s already called this whole EM insult thing the slow electrocution of everyone, he cured people with simple methods, got excommunicated from the profession, restored more recently i think with presidential honour in France) Arthur Firstenberg watched mortality spikes after system switch ons in some US cities, which led to i think all public helath pros in the Boston area to sign a petition to halt the impending switch on there, all i think since pressured to retract (i've a copy)

 

Firstenberg also put together a useful list of lower power study (like Lai & Levitt) ref. re ill bioeffect, see eg pg5 chart made (dtata to '01, but very much more since)

http://www.eloverkanslig.se/rapporter/Havas.pdf

 

sorry disjointed prose, in a big hurry right now

Buddy Kat

radiorahim wrote:

Now we get to the crux of the matter...you don't like the look of the cell tower in your neighbourhood.

You see, I want there to be lots and lots of cell towers preferably with some very high gain receiving antennas.

Why?

I want my cellphone to be heard by that cell tower with me putting out as little RF power as possible on my handset.   I don't want to "need" 750 milliwatts or a watt to hit that tower...I want to be able to hit it with say 100 or maybe even as little as 50 milliwatts.

Why?

I've said already that my problem is with the handsets...not the towers.   I am concerned about RF that's a couple of inches from your head.   That's not a good idea in my books.

So if that handset is running only 50-100 milliwatts...that's much better than it running a full watt of RF output.

Secondly, if my handset only needs to put out 50-100 milliwatts, I'm going to get much longer life out of my cellphone battery.    The less output power, the more battery life.    That's good for the environment.

 

Yes I like this idea of very low power cell phones..and furthur the towers could be receiver towers only (many more required but safe) using a broad band connection to tap into a phone line sending the call to a master antenna that is in the city (seeing as the city dwellers don’t seem to give a crap about the emf being rammed into there biological tissue)…..then  the signal is uplinked to a satellite that downlinks in a way similar to gps.

 

Have the cell phone companies pay for the whole shot as they are placing peoples health and life in jeopardy and covering it up. That would be the end of the cell phone safety story and everyone would be happy.

 

As receiving towers they could be very small and even masked and placed on power polls for example and eliminate the need for the tall high coverage structires that are also putting out lots of power.

 

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AkM5eyN8ytI&feature=user

Fidel

Corporate bias in brain tumor research

[url=[/url]">http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/bias.asp][IMG]http://img.photobucke...

The article(click on the image above) points out serious flaws in the industry funded research, so much so that it seems unbelievable scientists could be so incompetent. The truth is that what those scientists are doing when they fudge and slant the data like that is they are telling us that they have no choice. They are reliant on corporate funding. And it's sad. We feel very badly for them, but at least they are making it obvious for us all to know that their reports have been bought and paid-for by big business interests.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

K, enough about this shit, let's get some people elected.

 

GO NDP!

D V

RevolutionPlease wrote:

K, enough about this shit, let's get some people elected.

 

GO NDP!

Hey, Rev', I agree, but I don't care which party. SOme of you might know i was closely involved with Greens , quit the fed ones over inaction on this (Ont prov ones for other sad behaviour). They have had specific policy  & statements on topic, favourable somewhat, but too shy or incompetent to speak up. Today NDP Carol Hughes (filling in for Leslie since she was at all relevant meetings) is expected to be the strongest voice for some favourable action at HESA (starts 11 a.m. , in camera), BQ brought the file to HESA, but who knows where they'll go, maybe with an expected minority report about action needed re dangers, Libs. as ever evasive with main person Duncan talking unfortunately about more delay with "expert panel", Cons, well, even if a few o' their HESA MPS were personally swayed will very likely not feel enabled to stray, and the govt will likely take the customary 6 mo. to do zero, at least there will have been more publicity, to keep the snowball growing. This is ongoing, no gen. election campaign now -- phone your MPs' office to say you want HESA to recommend strong protective measures. Expect court cases to follow at HESA failure/disappointment.

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

Fidel wrote:

Corporate bias in brain tumor research

[url=[/url]">http://www.powerwatch.org.uk/science/bias.asp][IMG]http://img.photobucke...

The article(click on the image above) points out serious flaws in the industry funded research, so much so that it seems unbelievable scientists could be so incompetent. The truth is that what those scientists are doing when they fudge and slant the data like that is they are telling us that they have no choice. They are reliant on corporate funding. And it's sad. We feel very badly for them, but at least they are making it obvious for us all to know that their reports have been bought and paid-for by big business interests.

Yeah, those big business buy-offs are darned scary.  But hey, what about small business profit?  Does that count?

The graph is from the Powerwatch site.  Guess what?  They have for sale various devices that will protect you from the nefarious EMF.  Profit motive?  Check!

Here's an interesting link from the aptly named Bad Science blog that has a number of entries and some information on where the information is coming from and why it's not so unbiased as it purports to be: 

http://www.badscience.net/category/powerwatch-alasdair-philips/

Scratch the surface, then give it another scratch, eh? Don't stop at just the point where they confirm what you think ought to be.

D V

What utter nonsense, 'bandit. You and the likes of the high priests at COMAR.  A zillion $ industry with unseen bankers behind coupled with weaponry horrors protected by a phalanx of debunkers and engineers who treat the human body as if it were as mechanical as they are minded. Great contribution yours to this thread.

Timebandit Timebandit's picture

Ad hominem attack in place of arguing the substance of my post.  Classy!

What part is nonsense?  The fact that Fidel's information is as biased as any other? 

Hey, folks, getcher tinfoil EMF caps here!!!  A bargain at any price!

Come off it, the woomeisters are as much in it for the cash as the telcos.  Now go hide under your bed like a good little acolyte and don't listen to the bad people talking sense - you'll get a tumor!

Fidel

Note the lack of advertising on that site, too. They have to pay for it some how. Why not sell items that they actually believe will help people?

Nobody here but us corporate schills. Isn't that right, Timebandit? Here's an idea, why not comment on the fact that some large percentage of non-corporate financed studies are finding issues with cell phone radiation while a smaller percentage of industry financed studies are finding harmful effects? Or do you find mobile phone shielding products more interesting than the topic of discussion at hand?

Is it a case that only corporate science can be corrupted by money, or is there a conspiracy among independent scientists not in the hire of big business to bring down the cell phone industry? In that case I would have only one question:

Why?

D V

'bandit, not so much selling hats, or as someone else like you said at another site, jockstraps, go for microwave meters & metal insect screen, just like the Amrericans used at the Moscow Embassy, just like we are forced to use now at home, just like Levitt & Lai provocatively brought up in their paper. Soviet irradiation of them at levels far below our own domestic limits, sickening & killing staff, so"our" side goes on to develop MW weaponry & keeps the domestic standards unchanged.

al-Qa'bong

The other night after "Leaf Talk," AM640 had a "Coast to Coast" program devoted to time travel.  They had a guy on who was saying how travelling into the future is not only possible, it's happening.

 

While I don't think these 9-11/cellphone evility/alien threads make the left look like a bunch of looney-tune late-night radio callers-in, they certainly diminish the tenor of discussion on babble.

Pages

Topic locked