RE: ionizing radiation

[John Steck]

All EM radiation excites water molecules... I no longer have access to the exact numbers but risks are minimal UNLESS you are a road warrior with a handset next to your head constantly.  The primary side affect is a slight localized warming of nearby tissue (in addition to radiated speaker heat).  There are no other observed direct or indirect by-products (that have been publicly shared).  The effect was more pronounced with the early analog handset that broadcast a continuous 6w of power (1989-90)... today's digital handsets are much friendlier as they are only pumping out less than 1.5w in more burst patterns.   In general, permissible handset radiation is closely regulated by the government.  Typically there is allot of antenna de-tuning to hit compliance levels.

 

If you are still concerned, there are phone configurations that minimize EM effects.  In general, candy-bar phones and flip phones with internal patch antennas are the worst for you.  The antenna is close to your head by design, and typical users push it closer to their head to hear better.  Regulations are being rewritten for these types of phones to better take usage habits into consideration.  Flip phones with external antenna structures are best.  My personal favorite has been the Motorola V60 for several reasons.... the antenna projects away from your head when in use, the metal housing between you and the antenna reflects EM away from you, the reduced EM signature at the head allows less antenna de-tuning and greater reception.

 

There was a great concept phone working it's way through the building a couple years ago that would have really been ideal if it survived the vetting process.  Essentially it was a flip phone with an integrated antenna trace film molded into the extended flip structure.  It put EM father away from the user than any other previous design to date.  No antenna de-tuning was needed at all.  Reception range was phenomenal and effective radiation to the head was cut significantly.  Unfortunately it never got the needed sponsor or customer to get it out of R&D and into production.

 

I agree with the comment below that there are far more pervasive EM sources around us (like the electron gun pointing at me right now).

 

-john

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Merlyn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 8:58 AM
To: vortex-l@eskimo.com
Subject: Re: ionizing radiation

Note that the strength of EM radiation from a cell phone is highest when it connects to the tower, at the start of a call, incoming or outgoing.  I don't recall the precise numbers, but I saw the experiment on 'Mythbusters' when they were dealing with the cell phone / gas station myth.

 

So the highest level of radiation is produced when the phone rings, or when you hit call after dialing the number.  In either case the phone is typically nowhere near your head.

 

The reason your head may feel hot after continued cell use is due to the waste heat from the phone.

 

Apples and oranges certainly, but you are comparing 2 apples to about 2000 oranges.  AM towers transmit at a much higher power.

 

The EM radiation from the cell transmitter shouldn't travel up the wires for your earpiece.

 

As for cases of brain cancer, maybe you should look to your CRT monitor as the culprit?

thomas malloy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>Tom wrote:

and Mike Carrel replied

>
>
>> I did a remodeling project on what once was a medical clinic. When we
>> cut into the walls, there were sheets of lead in them.
>
>Lead would be used to stop Xrays, nothing more.

It was a thin layer of lead, would such a layer stop short X rays too?

> >
>> I am interested in stopping EMF, in particular short wave X rays and
>> possibly shorter wave EMF.
>
>Check your numbers. The only thing shorter than Xrays are gamma rays emitted
>by radioactive substances and accelerators.

I've seen a chart like that, I'll have to visit the library and look at one.

>
> If I put it into a grounded metal, or
>
>As a first rule of thumb, YES. But EM radiation will leak out of a box like
>water or! a gas weakly. There is a whole discipline that goes under the code
>name TEMPEST

Thanks for that name.

> >What if I
>> had electrical conductors, coming out of the Faraday Cage, would the
>> short wave EMF be conducted with them? Would a transformer stop them?
>
>You bet. They are antennas, as are any gaps in the shielding of the box.
>Transformers only stop DC and can be transparent to everything else.

Is there some way to make a transformer that is opaque to them?

> >
>> There was a man who was interviewed on C to C AM last week. He talked
> > about cell phones.
>
>The man is misguided. A cell phone when on and in stanby will listen to the
>nearest cell phoone tower, comparing its address with the last address
>received. When you turn it on, it will transmit a burst, reporting in, so
>the system knows where your phone is. Your phone then goes passive, just
>listening until you take it to another tower's cell; it will transmit
>another burst, reporting in, etc. Think logically. Your phone will not waste
>battery power transmitting all the time, nor do the towers want hundreds of
>phones all yacking at it needlessly.

You don't seem to be concerned about these occasional bursts of
radiation, Mike, he disagrees with you

>
>>Then there are the towers, he said that
>> you don't want to be within 500 feet of one.
>
>Utter nonsense. The individual transmitters have a power of about 7.5 watts,
>equal to a christmas tree light bulb. The are up high so they can be 'seen'
>froma distance and the antennas are designed to emit most of their energy as
>a narrow horizontal fan so as to reach as far as possible. Nearby at ground
>level you get only the feeble leakage from the antennas. They are so safe
>that the FCC does not require s! ite surveys or licensing in setting up cell
>towers.

Hum, again the two of you are at variance over this matter. He claims
that the side of your head will feel hot from continued cell phone
use. IMHO, this not a good sign. He says that the number of brain
cancers in the vicinity of the antenna continues to increase.

>
>I used the ear jack when
>> I made phone calls, but apparently the EMF follows the wires into the
>> ear jack. If his story is correct, over population will not be a
>> problem for much longer.
>
>His story is not correct, it is grossly exaggerated and misleading. There
>are some allegations that holding a cell phone to your ear places the
>antenna next to your brain and its radiation may affect brain tissue. Years
>ago there was a suit by a man (or his widow) alleging that the cell phone
>initiated a brain cancer at that spot. If this were generally true, there
>would be a worldwide epidemic of brain cancer by now.

He says that the aforementioned epidemic is here, or rather that we
are just seeing the tip of the iceberg.

>Think logically.
>People may choose to go hands-free, with a ear bud, and tiny microphone pod,
>and the cell phone in their pocket, and walk around talking to the air. The
>cell phone antenna can then irradiate your leg instead of your brain.

Hum, good point.

>
>With the above caveats, long term use of a transmitter next to your head is
>probably not a great idea, but any bad effects are very hard to quantify.
>There were similar concerns about living near high voltage transmission
>lines. There were some stories about clusters of disease, including cancers,
>near high voltage lines. The clusters were there, but evidence linking them
>to the high voltage fields and not some other environmental cause was
>lacking.

As I understand it, children living in the first house down from the
transformer are at a higher risk than children in subsequent houses.
Adults are at a lower risk than children, and fetuses at a higher
risk.

>
>Some years ago, Verizon wnated to erect a cell tower at the local police
>station. I attended some of the meetings. A woman was all distressed about
>irradiation of her house because she had read one of the idiot books. She
>was oblivious to the antenna of a 50 kW AM radio station a mile or so away,
>which has houses all around it for decades. Its signal is so strong I had to
>put filters on the telephone lines and my computer modem to avoid
>inteference. I get 25 mV of that transmitter on any stub of wire in the
>house.

I think that he would say apples and oranges. The wave length of the
cell phone EMF is way shorter than the AM radio waves.

Merlyn
Magickal Engineer and Technical Metaphysicist

---

Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.