I do, but I've had the wired headphone cord get stuck on some dangerous objects, or too tangled up to answer the phone without looking.
Plus I need to buy some more ferrite beads at the electronics junk shop.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
[Merged] iPhone and Radiation Safety
- Thread starter southcounty949
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I do, but I've had the wired headphone cord get stuck on some dangerous objects, or too tangled up to answer the phone without looking.
Plus I need to buy some more ferrite beads at the electronics junk shop.
This is the reason or country is going in a downhill spiral, no one reads or researches things anymore. They just hear what their friends telll them and think its real
OR even worse
They post articles from research papers online and state that they support their argument
DID ANYONE OF YOU READ THOSE ARTICLES
NO article, and i mean NOT A SINGLE one will support the idea that a 1.5W/kg of sar radiation will cause cancer. Sure they found some signs or reduced oxidation with SAR of 6 W/Kg, but no phone puts out that much radiation
Besides reduced oxidative metabolism doesn't mean anything, and there's no way you would ever be able to link that to cancer.
You should read into glutamate toxicity. Having too much activity in your brain can actually increase memory loss.
The human body is not like an engine it doesn't run "at peak performance" and it can actually be harmful to be in that state for an extended period of time
OR even worse
They post articles from research papers online and state that they support their argument
DID ANYONE OF YOU READ THOSE ARTICLES
NO article, and i mean NOT A SINGLE one will support the idea that a 1.5W/kg of sar radiation will cause cancer. Sure they found some signs or reduced oxidation with SAR of 6 W/Kg, but no phone puts out that much radiation
Besides reduced oxidative metabolism doesn't mean anything, and there's no way you would ever be able to link that to cancer.
You should read into glutamate toxicity. Having too much activity in your brain can actually increase memory loss.
The human body is not like an engine it doesn't run "at peak performance" and it can actually be harmful to be in that state for an extended period of time
While what you're saying makes sense, you do realize your post is no better than any others. You're telling us not to take anyone's word for what they claim to be fact in their posts, but then you post without citing any sources.
It's not worth discussing an issue with someone who is willing to claim almost every mental disorder in the book to discredit people that disagree with him or her. And of course use the disoders incorrectly. "Schizotypal personality disorder", lol, you are sure aren't a member of the mental health field. Go with the DSM and accuse all the reseachers too in the field, and the politicians, and the public, and the task forces that deal with the extended issues of radiation and health as mentally disordered too. Marvelous. Plus your wording here borders on the abusive "Dr."
Grow up man, I ll send you an iphone for free, no strings attached. And btw, the "you are hypochondriacs/iphone is great/go live in nucleare shelter" camp seems to be psychic or at least some very possess some very powerful psychological insight on other posters all of a sudden since the can ascribe their problems to association/cognitive dissonance/suggestion etc.etc. beside their well known expertise in the electromagnetism and medical fields.
Ha, ha, why not, I was reading this somewhere too.
Amen, brother.
@Duffzilla
Great to hear another poster talking some sense.
well put your tin foil hats on because there going to be rolling out a 4G network within the next 6 months. so if your sceptical about what cell phones do now wait until you have to us a glove to make a phone call and wear a monitor that warns you of over exposure.
Can you please explain to the forum why the 4G will be even more potentially hazardous to us for both inherent reasons and due to it's initial lower coverage (i.e. more power emmited). Most people here are unaware of that and you would be doing them a huge service. I could go into it, but since you brought it up.
lol i think you missed my point . I was saying don't take anyone's word about a study, instead go out and read it yourself
People on this forum where saying that those papers supported the fact that cell phone radiation caused cellular damage. If you read the paper the results showed that they did not. Only when they used levels that were significantly higher did they find any differences
What I said still stands true, if you don't believe go read the papers yourself
Umm, so by identifying a symptom and listing a possible differential diagnosis that means " every mental disorder in the book"..... wow you really don't know anything do you,
look at my wording, I used the term indicate, in order to be diagnosed with any mental disorder you need to fufill certain symptomatic criteria ( outlined in DSM-IV TR .. which interestingly enough is on my desk right now)
anyways there's no use in arguing with you. How about you go back to your Faraday cage and put on your tin hat
It'll be interesting what the data for acoustc schwannomas show in a few years on long-term study. That's one "brain" tumour that's being hinted at as a possibility that mobile phones may increase the incidence of. There's been some conflicting studies - some showing a correlation some not. Only the long term data and some good large population studies that are underway will show us definitively.
At this stage claiming that mobile phones are completely innocuous is perhaps a little hasty, as the evidence just isn't there. We need long-term data. Likewise to claim categorically that mobile phones are proven to be bad for one's health is also a little hasty and not supported by conclusive evidence.
p.s. Didn't read thread mainly because the last couple of pages of petty squabbling made my eyes bleed.
At this stage claiming that mobile phones are completely innocuous is perhaps a little hasty, as the evidence just isn't there. We need long-term data. Likewise to claim categorically that mobile phones are proven to be bad for one's health is also a little hasty and not supported by conclusive evidence.
p.s. Didn't read thread mainly because the last couple of pages of petty squabbling made my eyes bleed.
Umm, so by identifying a symptom and listing a possible differential diagnosis that means " every mental disorder in the book"..... wow you really don't know anything do you,
look at my wording, I used the term indicate, in order to be diagnosed with any mental disorder you need to fufill certain symptomatic criteria ( outlined in DSM-IV TR .. which interestingly enough is on my desk right now)
anyways there's no use in arguing with you. How about you go back to your Faraday cage and put on your tin hat
If you were really a shrink you'd know that a long distance diagnosis such as the one you "attempted" has been prohibited since the 50s or 60s and the then scandal with the u.s. president. Look it up for some mental health education. And you might know that taking things literally like when I say "every mental disorder in the book" I mean every single one of them bar none in the actual book is one of the foremost symptoms of schizophrenia. But I am not your type to brand you a schizo. There were no arguments from you to begin with and you are back to the "go back to your faraday cage with you tin hat" type of arguing, what a class guy you are man. In the rare chance that you are indeed in the mental health field you are well aware that you should be on the inside looking out.
Post of the thread for me. Petty squabbling is pretty much what some posters here have dragged this thread down to, those that prescribe faraday cages, and as you say they are next to impossible to read. Let me sum up for you that there are not too many alarmists here and most take a balanced view but there's plenty of fanboism and "go hide in a faraday cage"ism that have dragged the level of this thread constantly down.
You're right, all of you. The iPhone has a dangerous transmitter in it. All GSM phones cause innumerable health problems, and those of us who haven't noticed are either in the pocket of the telcos or are already suffering from the effects.
We were so close too. We had millions of people in on the scam: we had doctors and scientists claiming that RF emissions of those levels were safe; we had folks in countries around the world pretending to use these devices with no ill effects... all in an attempt to lull you into a false sense of security. We thought that your common sense would tell you that the technology has been in use long enough for any acute symptoms to be noticed.
In the end that proved to be our undoing. Little did we know that you, the true defender of the people, are immune to our weapons of logic and reason. You've defeated us.... for now. But mark my words, you haven't seen the last of us. The Legion of the Cellphone will rise again!
We were so close too. We had millions of people in on the scam: we had doctors and scientists claiming that RF emissions of those levels were safe; we had folks in countries around the world pretending to use these devices with no ill effects... all in an attempt to lull you into a false sense of security. We thought that your common sense would tell you that the technology has been in use long enough for any acute symptoms to be noticed.
In the end that proved to be our undoing. Little did we know that you, the true defender of the people, are immune to our weapons of logic and reason. You've defeated us.... for now. But mark my words, you haven't seen the last of us. The Legion of the Cellphone will rise again!
But I'm American! I shouldn't have to do brain work!
More seriously, this thread is going nowhere. I didn't think it could get less informative a week ago but I was wrong apparently. Y'all really need to grow up.
I suspect Jack confuses "take a balanced view" with "agree with Jack". I also doubt that the evidence on this thread supports that assertion of "most".
Jack, as charlatans and scaremongers do, you've pre-determined and published your conclusions without any valid science to support them, whilst claiming "all the scientific evidence supports me". (No it doesn't, actually.)
I bet you still haven't read "Bad Science" but you really should.
As we speak the Nations top Contractors are scrambling to build thousands of new towers capable of handling 4g technology. each tower will have a set of multi directional antenna's that will be sending out a signal so strong that you can not only watch a movie like you can now but you can download it instantly. The slowest speed they want anywhere in the nation is equivalent to T1 or DSL. And a lot of people are going to say "well I can watch TV on my phone right now or something similar". But when 4g rolls out the signal will be so strong you can watch TV hundreds of miles from the nearest tower and change changes like flipping a TV remote. From what I understand when you make a phone call it will be more like VOIP so it will be like your phone is constantly connected to the service like a computer is constantly connected to a Cable internet. When the network comes online in the next 6-8 months it will be interesting to see what happens
As we speak the Nations top Contractors are scrambling to build thousands of new towers capable of handling 4g technology. each tower will have a set of multi directional antenna's that will be sending out a signal so strong that you can not only watch a movie like you can now but you can download it instantly. The slowest speed they want anywhere in the nation is equivalent to T1 or DSL. And a lot of people are going to say "well I can watch TV on my phone right now or something similar". But when 4g rolls out the signal will be so strong you can watch TV hundreds of miles from the nearest tower and change changes like flipping a TV remote. From what I understand when you make a phone call it will be more like VOIP so it will be like your phone is constantly connected to the service like a computer is constantly connected to a Cable internet. When the network comes online in the next 6-8 months it will be interesting to see what happens
to clarify no company that I know of has even mentioned coming out with 4g to the public YET because it has taken over 7 years to develop the technology because the old systems simply cannot handle admitting that much power and at the frequencies they need to sustain that type of service .
You seem to have a very loose grasp of how wireless technology actual works.
Throughput != output power
I have a grip on what I need to understand and that is the safety aspect and exposure limits permissible by OHSA, FCC and I also do intermod studies. If you want to hear the technical side of it thats 195.00 an hour. Or if you like Ill send you a free demo of a RF Safety Awareness course we have online. That may help you understand a little more about RF. anyone that would like to see the demo let me know its free but the full online course gives much more detail
@rsisafety Thanks for taking this up!
@ppc750, where do you disagree with rs? If you do please post something constructive as to the new 4g tec we'll see in the coming years wrt health and network infrastructure. Let me add here that a competing technology will be wimax.
@ppc750, where do you disagree with rs? If you do please post something constructive as to the new 4g tec we'll see in the coming years wrt health and network infrastructure. Let me add here that a competing technology will be wimax.
and we've surveyed Wimax antenna's at some of the universities and those things are awesome when climbing the tower as we took readings there was only one spot above safe levels and thats within about a foot so its a great product with little to no risk of injury to general public with over exposure.
you'll see a lot of these around schools.
Whoa. I never said this thread wasn't informative. And locked does not equal deleted. If anything, I think the thread should be stickied as well, so that people can read it and take what is presented here to come to their own conclusions. However, a long time ago this thread became nothing but trading insults. I can see you agree with me on that. So why not end it now, before things get any uglier? Anything that needs to be said has already been said.
I don't see how I'm being an ass at all. What I've said is completely reasonable.
safety through education
Too finish up for those that truly come here with a question
RF has been studied and found to be a "Physical Hazard" at different ranges but for public use like cell phones, the rf they admit is so far below what FCC calls the safe level that you should not be harmed by the RF from your cell phone. the main time's RF is dangerous is when your on a tower or on a roof top working around antennas but even then not every spot is dangerous and training is available to learn how to avoid danger spots and safely work around those hazards.
Too finish up for those that truly come here with a question
RF has been studied and found to be a "Physical Hazard" at different ranges but for public use like cell phones, the rf they admit is so far below what FCC calls the safe level that you should not be harmed by the RF from your cell phone. the main time's RF is dangerous is when your on a tower or on a roof top working around antennas but even then not every spot is dangerous and training is available to learn how to avoid danger spots and safely work around those hazards.