- Joined
- Nov 24, 2009
- Messages
- 2,443
- Reaction score
- 733
- Location
- San Francisco
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
… And I'm sure that these warning labels will have a substantial impact on cell phone use, on the off chance that the overwhelming scientific consensus is wrong.
Of the frequencies being used today for mobile phones --- I checked and you're correct that there's nothing conclusive either short term or long term.
First off, the overwhelming scientific consensus is that further study is required.
Chappy said:Second, you refer to the Board's action as requiring warning labels. That's wrong, too. You're batting 0 (zero) [nada] in this thread. The Board has required that the radiation levels be displayed next to the phones offered for sale. Posting radiation emission levels might be considered a public service by some or as an irrelevancy by others; either way, I suspect that the cell phone industry will manage to survive.
I usually get a headache when I talk on a cell phone for more than an hour, and that never happens to me with land line phones. I'm not saying cell phones cause cancer but something about electronics definitely affects me. I usually have to switch to speaker phone if I'm talking for a long time otherwise my head gets very warm and I have a headache. Call it anecdotal but it's the truth.
I usually get a headache when I talk on a cell phone for more than an hour, and that never happens to me with land line phones. I'm not saying cell phones cause cancer but something about electronics definitely affects me. I usually have to switch to speaker phone if I'm talking for a long time otherwise my head gets very warm and I have a headache. Call it anecdotal but it's the truth.
I do think on an energy level cell phones have to be doing something, but the same is true of all electronics so I don't see why cell phones deserve to be singled out.
Could be the ergonomics of the phone. With landlines (do those still exist?), you typically don't have a glass/plastic screen pressed up against your face. My doctor told me that cell phone use can cause acne (due to that nasty, sweaty, greasy screen), so I wouldn't be surprised if they can cause some other ergonomics-related health issues.
Radiation, however, isn't one of them.
How would the ergonomics cause a headache though? I'm open to theories. I don't crane my neck when I'm on the phone or do the no-handed conversation.
But you might hold it differently than a landline in a way that you don't even notice. Or perhaps you use the cell phone under different circumstances (i.e. walking/driving versus sitting/laying). Or maybe you typically use the cell phone at a different time of day than the landline.
First off, the overwhelming scientific consensus is that further study is required.
Second, you refer to the Board's action as requiring warning labels. That's wrong, too. You're batting 0 (zero) [nada] in this thread. The Board has required that the radiation levels be displayed next to the phones offered for sale. Posting radiation emission levels might be considered a public service by some or as an irrelevancy by others; either way, I suspect that the cell phone industry will manage to survive.
I used to live next to a train and the electromagnetic radiation of the tracks increased my frequency of illness. I expect people to call that pseudoscientific, but science doesn't know everything and it knows very little about how different forms of energy affect the human body.
I wouldn't call that pseudoscientific, I'd call that stupid. First of all, we have all sorts of information on how different forms of energy affect the body. Also, on what basis do you believe that it was the "electromagnetic radiation" of the tracks that caused your increase in illness and not some other factor?
I'm very aware of my own body and outside sources are not relevant. I noticed when I lived next to train tracks that my health declined. When I was away from home my health improved, only if it was for a few days.
Calling it stupid is closed minded but oh well, your choice. I don't care what "other sources of information" have to say. Statistics don't override my individual experience.
I'm not contesting that you got sick more, I'm contesting your assumption that it was the "electromagnetic energy" of the train tracks that caused it. Just because two things occured in the same time frame does not mean they are related.
You stated science has "very little" information on how different kinds of "energy" affect the human body. That's wrong. We have tons of information. I'm not talking about statistics here, I'm talking about physics. Seeing as how you have no physical capacity for even detecting electromagnetic energy, I think it's a pretty large leap for you to determine that such a thing is what caused your illness. Your refrigerator was exposing you to a stronger magnetic field than the train tracks were.
Edit: Assuming the train was the only variable that changed from your previous dwelling (it wasn't) I'd suppose that the sound from the trains was a far more likely stress that caused illness.
You're confusing two things …
Ah, harping on the distinction between a warning label on the phone and a warning label posted next to the phone. Cute.
Moreover, you once again ignore the point - do you actually think this is going to have a real impact on consumer choices? Is the information posted next to phones going to impact your cell phone usage? Do you think people are going to see these signs and decide to go back to land lines?
It's frivolous ****, on par with the vaccine-autism garbage.
Seeing as how the trains in my city operate on electro magnetism, I'm assuming it was electromagnetic energy.
I determined it through simple deduction.
I'm not sure what your attachment is to disproving my claim which, to me, is self-evident based on my experience. Maybe you feel that the ways in which you understand the world are being threatened or something, I don't really know. I can assure you, it wasn't accoustics. I'm a pretty sound sleeper. People who live near power lines can experience similar effects, if they are sensitive to it. Not everyone is though, so I can't make any sort of universal generalization.
I can only speak on behalf of myself.
Bull****. You just refuse to get it. It's not about not using cell phones, it's about buying the right cell phone. They're not all created equal. Consumers have the right to know.
Edit: Plus I'm a science geek and people posting things that are in direct contradiction of the laws of physics makes me giggle.
Edit 2: And what sort of train are you talking about?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?