Recovery Board  : RfM
Recovery from Mormonism (RfM) discussion forum. 
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In
Posted by: Kathleen ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 03:11PM

I hope that scientists on RfM will weigh in.

So much conflicting information on the safety of cell phones and microwaves.

I just don't see how all of this exposure can be good for us.



http://exmormon.org/phorum/read.php?2,1976841,1977572#msg-1977572

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: yetagain... ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 03:48PM

I worry more about the safety of being to commute back and forth from work each day. what was the last count? 30000? 40000? people killed each year on the roads? That makes roughly 2 each in the 50 states, each day of the year...

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: PDYF ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 03:57PM

I nearly get run off the road almost daily by jackasses texting while driving. So, even if phones don't cause brain tumors, they do seem to be hazardous to your health.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: rt ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 03:54PM

kathleen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I just don't see how all of this exposure can be
> good for us.

That would be an argument from personal incredulity, a logical fallacy.

Sorry, I don't have anything else to offer on this subject. But a double blind experiment, preferrably longitudinal, would be the way I'd go - if I thought there was a problem to begin with (which would probably have surfaced on other, unrelated longitudinal studies by now).

Then there is the case of my aunt Mary's neighbour's niece, whose friend's father developed a huge brain tumor, and he was a realtor who was always on his cell.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Kathleen ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 04:17PM

So, rt, there have been no double-blind longitudinal studies conducted that you are aware of? There have been so many questions over the years w/re to the topic, that I would think it might be a priority.

Sorry about Aunt Mary's neighbor's brother, btw.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: rt ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 04:23PM

kathleen Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So, rt, there have been no double-blind
> longitudinal studies conducted that you are aware
> of?

I don't know, have there?

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: shapeshifter ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 04:12PM

This is a great link to check out more than 5,000 scientific studies on the effects of wireless radiation.

http://www.justproveit.net/studies

And this is another excellent resource-

http://www.bioinitiative.org

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Concrete Zipper ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 05:07PM

I hope this thread doesn't blow up too badly. I'll respond here with some actual facts.

First let's discuss what "radiation" is. From Wikipedia's disambiguation page for the word, we see that there are a lot of definitions: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiation_(disambiguation)

The words "radiation" and "radiate" are similar the to words "radius" (as in circles) and "ray" (as in rays of sunshine). They have to do with things going away from a central point. In medicine, pain that "radiates" spreads outward from a central point. The word is used for lots of unrelated things that just happen to have the quality of spreading out from a central point. Keep that fact in mind because, to understand the effects of something, you need to know specifics about it, and not just the fact that it moves outward from a central location and can therefore be referred to as a type of "radiation".

Let's talk about some types of radiation that are harmful to human beings: gamma rays, x-rays, UV radiation, cosmic rays (if you're in space), nuclear radiation, alpha radiation and beta radiation. Gamma rays and x-rays are two words for the same thing (the difference in naming is historical). They, and UV radiation, are composed of high-energy photons. Yes, photons, the same thing as visible light. The difference between the former and the latter is that the former have much higher energy per photon. In fact, they have enough energy that a single photon can break the bonds between atoms and cause chemical changes. That's why they can cause cancer: they can drill holes in your DNA and randomly change the genetic code. Bad stuff.

"Nuclear" radiation is a vague term, but here we'll consider it to be high-speed (i.e. high energy) neutrons and protons. A particle of alpha radiation is the nucleus of a helium atom that is barreling along like a bat out of hell. A beta particle is an electron that is similarly cruising. "But wait!", you say. "My body is made of protons and neutrons and electrons, and I've breathed helium out of a balloon to make my voice high and squeaky. Am I going to die?" Remember, the difference is in how much energy is in the particular particle. If it's moving slowly, it won't hurt you. If it's moving really fast and runs into you, it can do damage. It's the same reason why you can safely hold a bullet in your hand, but would prefer that someone not shoot that same bullet into you with a rifle.

What about radioactive stuff and nuclear fallout? These are made of unstable atoms that decay and shoot out one of the above types of radiation. The shorter the half-life, the shorter the average time for a particular atom to decay, so if you have a bunch of unstable atoms with a short half life, more of them are going to be decaying and spitting out nasties. The longer the half life, the less often these occur. If the half life is very long (like infinite), the atoms are stable and don't decay, and thus don't emit dangerous radiation.

Particles that have enough energy to break chemical bonds are called "ionizing radiation". This is the bad stuff that can hurt you by damaging your DNA and causing cancer. Particles that don't have enough energy to break chemical bonds are called "non-ionizing radiation". They won't give you cancer. They might cause some heat, but as long as you don't get burned, they're really not much different than any other heat source.

So, what's the deal with the radiation from cell phones, microwaves and WiFi? They are radio waves: non-ionizing radiation made of photons, with each photon waaay under the energy limit where it can break chemical bonds. In decreasing order of energy per photon, we have gamma rays and x-rays, UV rays, visible light, infrared radiation, millimeter wave radiation, microwave radiation and then various other names for radio waves. The names "millimeter wave", "microwave" and a bunch of names for different kinds of radio waves are also historical in nature, but they're all types of radio waves (and all of them are photons with different amounts of energy). If gamma rays are bullets and UV rays are pin pricks, photons in the microwave region (where cell phones, microwave ovens and WiFi operate) are big fluffy cotton balls. Toss those at someone all day and it won't hurt them.

"But my microwave oven burns things! I left popcorn in there and it caught fire." Individually the microwave photons don't have much energy, but concentrate enough of them together and they can heat something up. It's just like using a magnifying glass to burn holes in paper. The difference is that it causes heat, and the photons themselves can't break chemical bonds. Do you know what happens if you operate a microwave oven with the door open? I knew a physicist who did this. He said that it was like looking at a camp fire: his face got warm. (He knew what he was doing. Don't you try this.) Again, as long as you don't get burned, it won't cause lasting effects.

"But what about small exposure over a long period of time?" To a heat source? Try this experiment: hold a warm baby next to you for a long time. Did you get cancer? Does central heating cause cancer? Heat is heat.

Here's another freaky factoid: you, due to your nature as a warm blooded creature, are currently emitting tens of watts of infrared radiation at everything around you. Each infrared photon has far more energy than anything produced by your cell phone, WiFi router or your microwave oven. In fact, the total amount of energy you radiate is also more than your phone or router put out (or your microwave oven leaks). Your cell phone and WiFi router each radiate less than one watt of total power. Your microwave oven leaks less than that (though there are several hundred watts inside, so don't climb in).

You? You're emitting tens of watts. Is your personally emitted radiation causing cancer in other people? Is it making them sick?

What about all those studies about cell phones and power lines causing cancer? They're pretty lousy studies. The original power line studies were done epidemiologically, meaning that they didn't actually do controlled experiments, but just looked at cancer statistics, power line locations, etc. In epidemiological studies, it is extremely difficult to control for confusing factors. Power lines tend to run along side of roads, which are polluted by car exhaust. Proximity to power lines can vary according to socioeconomic class, meaning that people with widely varied lifestyles and access to medical care may live at statistically different distances from power lines.

There has not been one credible, decently controlled study that has linked cell phone radiation with cancer or other illness.
https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/cell-phones-fact-sheet

There has not be one credible, decently controlled study that has linked power line exposure with cancer or other illness.
https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/electromagnetic-fields-fact-sheet

Given the extreme rise in the number of people using mobile phones over the past few years, if their radio waves caused cancer (even if rarely), we would have seen a massively significant jump in the number of cases of those kinds of cancers. This has not happened. The same goes for the effects of power lines. Instead, the hints and barely significant "bumps" that the studies show are very likely to be normal statistical artifacts in how scientific studies are done.

What about people who claim to be sensitive or allergic to electromagnetic fields? The interesting thing here is that there has not been a single case of someone who claims such sensitivity who can tell whether they are actually in the presence of such fields. Not one person. If you control for confusing factors (noise, visibility of equipment, etc.), they can't tell if someone out of their sight flips a switch and bathes them in radio waves. Do such people have real symptoms? Of course. Are they caused by electromagnetic radiation? No. Such "sensitivity" is psychosomatic.

Anyone who tries to convince a person that they have such a sensitivity is doing them a grave disservice. No competent medical professional will offer such a diagnosis.

CZ

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Devoted Exmo ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 05:16PM

Thank-you for that coherent explanation. I appreciated it very much!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Brother Of Jerry ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 05:24PM

I'm bookmarking this sucker. Nice work, CZ

Yes, *you* emit more radiation, and at a far higher frequency, than your cell phone. A bathroom night light is a far greater radiation hazard, and it isn't a radiation hazard at all.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Kathleen ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 05:35PM

I'm bookmarking it, too.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Schaffner ( )
Date: May 26, 2017 05:16PM

Thank you CZ! That's the best explanation of this issue that I have seen.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Kathleen ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 05:32PM

CZ, you didn't state your profession nor background, but if your response is from your own education and experience (which I am guessing it is), thank you for this information on various types of radiation.

I don't know, that's why I ask.

Thanks again.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/24/2017 05:53PM by kathleen.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Concrete Zipper ( )
Date: May 25, 2017 06:44PM

Kathleen,

Yes, this information is from my own education and experience.

I'm glad that you found it helpful.

CZ

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Kathleen ( )
Date: May 25, 2017 07:25PM

It's vastly helpful! I appreciate it very much! :)

Your generous response has enabled me to relax and worry less about my children using their cell phones, microwaves, etc. I bet that many people on the board benefited!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 05/25/2017 07:41PM by kathleen.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Babyloncansuckit ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 05:58PM

Unless you're one of the rare people who are sensitive to these kinds of low level fields, you should be fine. Are they bad? Well, they are everywhere and I don't see people dropping like flies. If you suspect you're sensitive, get away from them for a while and see how your body reacts.

Of course, they are too weak to cause physical damage to the body. This assumes that we know everything there is to be known about how magnetic fields act upon the body. There's a possibility that we don't. It could be another kind of smog that has long term negative health consequences. I suggest you pray about it.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Amyjo ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 06:47PM

"What do expert organizations conclude about the cancer risk from EMFs?

In 2002, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a component of the World Health Organization, appointed an expert Working Group to review all available evidence on static and extremely low frequency electric and magnetic fields (12). The Working Group classified ELF-EMFs as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” based on limited evidence from human studies in relation to childhood leukemia. Static electric and magnetic fields and extremely low frequency electric fields were determined “not classifiable as to their carcinogenicity to humans” (12).

In 2015, the European Commission Scientific Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health Risks reviewed electromagnetic fieldsExit Disclaimer in general, as well as cell phones in particular. It found that, overall, epidemiologic studies of extremely low frequency fields show an increased risk of childhood leukemia with estimated daily average exposures above 0.3 to 0.4 μT, although no mechanisms have been identified and there is no support from experimental studies that explains these findings. It also found that the epidemiologic studies on radiofrequency exposure do not show an increased risk of brain tumors or other cancers of the head and neck region, although the possibility of an association with acoustic neuroma remains open (56)."

https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/radiation/electromagnetic-fields-fact-sheet#q6

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Concrete Zipper ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 07:17PM

Amyjo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Working Group classified ELF-EMFs
> as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” based on
> limited evidence from human studies in relation to
> childhood leukemia.

I just want to clarify what the word "possibly" means there. It doesn't mean that if you're exposed to electromagnetic fields that you may possibly get cancer. It means that the working groups believes that there is a possibility that such fields can cause cancer -- at all. Or it's possible (in fact probable) that the fields can't. The working group didn't want to commit to ruling it out completely.

If it were more likely than not that electromagnetic fields caused cancer, the working group would have classified them as "probably carcinogenic".

> In 2015, the European Commission Scientific
> Committee on Emerging and Newly Identified Health
> Risks reviewed electromagnetic fields
> in general, as well as cell phones in
> particular. It found that, overall, epidemiologic
> studies of extremely low frequency fields show an
> increased risk of childhood leukemia with
> estimated daily average exposures above 0.3 to 0.4
> μT, although no mechanisms have been identified
> and there is no support from experimental studies
> that explains these findings. It also found that
> the epidemiologic studies on radiofrequency
> exposure do not show an increased risk of brain
> tumors or other cancers of the head and neck
> region, although the possibility of an association
> with acoustic neuroma remains open (56)."

Remember what I said about epidemiological studies: they are very hard to control properly.

And if you're worried about magnetic fields in the 0.3 to 0.4 μT range, remember that the Earth's natural magnetic field is about 50 μT.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: ificouldhietokolob ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 07:18PM

CZ was pretty damn thorough.

So please allow me to just point out how nonsense and fear get spread -- referring to the "wifinschools.com" website only:

The page says:

"This website is dedicated to helping the public realize that wireless internet, or WiFi, emits radiation that causes a myriad of serious health effects, including damage to DNA, cancer, and infertility."

This is classic nonsense. And the reason so many people fall for it? Because they surround the nonsense with the teeniest bit of fact.

See, it's absolutely true that "wifi" emits radiation that (can) cause(s) a myriad of serious health effects.
The problem is, that "myriad of serious health effects" can only be caused by the kind of "radiation" (radio waves) that wifi emits at levels hundreds of thousands of times greater than the levels used by wifi.

So if you stand next to a huge radio transmission tower (and yes, distance does matter) putting out hundreds of thousands of watts, for several years (yes, time of exposure does matter), there's a chance the radio wave radiation could cause some "serious health effects."

There isn't much of a chance at all that you're going to ever, over your entire lifetime, get anywhere near that much radiation from a wifi router. Even a big, juiced-up, professional one.

So while part of their claim is true, it's mostly false -- but there's just enough truth in it to scare people.

Oh, and just after that, the page states:

"Research shows that autism, ADHD, and other behavioral problems are also associated with wireless radiation exposure."

That one is pretty much entirely false. But since they hooked folks on the semi-true one above, they're more likely to then swallow this completely false one whole, without batting an eye.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Kathleen ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 10:37PM

Thank you, Hie!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Humberto ( )
Date: May 25, 2017 06:59AM

ificouldhietokolob Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> So if you stand next to a huge radio transmission
> tower (and yes, distance does matter) putting out
> hundreds of thousands of watts, for several years
> (yes, time of exposure does matter), there's a
> chance the radio wave radiation could cause some
> "serious health effects."
>
> There isn't much of a chance at all that you're
> going to ever, over your entire lifetime, get
> anywhere near that much radiation from a wifi
> router. Even a big, juiced-up, professional one.
>

To be clear, "hundreds of thousands of watts" is a lot of energy to be standing next to. Your body will absorb and convert that energy to heat and you will cook rather quickly.

Perhaps I'm misunderstanding, but you seem to be convoluting ionizing and non ionizing radiation, the former having cumulative effects on the body, while the latter only affects the body during exposure via energy absorption and subsequent conversion to heat.

The reason that your WiFi won't hurt you is because the energy levels aren't high enough to heat your body to dangerous levels (or really any perceptible amount), not because it causes cumulative damage. The reason you don't want to get an x-ray on a regular basis is because that's ionizing radiation and causes cumulative damage.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Kathleen ( )
Date: May 24, 2017 10:37PM

Shapeshifter, I hope your heart is a lighter tonight. Mine is.

Thank you everyone for your responses!

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: midwestanon ( )
Date: May 25, 2017 12:18AM

I'm guessing shape shifter is either ignoring this thread or thinking up the best way to continue to defend his wholly unsubstantiated claims.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Dave the Atheist ( )
Date: May 25, 2017 12:03AM

cell phones do not give you brain cancer. Next question......

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Babyloncansuckit ( )
Date: May 25, 2017 12:48AM

But they may cause your shelf to collapse.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Babyloncansuckit ( )
Date: May 25, 2017 02:05AM

Phones also only transmit with enough power to make the connection. So most of the time, that isn't much. You're getting a lot less exposure than the early users of mobile radio.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: cricket ( )
Date: May 25, 2017 06:21AM

Epidemiological studies prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that 15 million Mormons suffer various forms of brain death. The severity of the critical loss of brain cells and neurons increases exponentially with regular three-hour block church attendance, full tithe payment on gross income rather than on net income and membership in FAIR.ORG.

One theory is that the wearing of garments actually contains the harmful rays of The Holy Ghost's radiation, not allowing them to escape harmlessly and return to Kolob from whence they radiated in the first place. In other words, garments are "tight like unto a dish" in sacred radiation harmful effects.

I prayed about these results and felt a microwave like warmth that nearly ignited my bosom.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: schweizerkind ( )
Date: May 26, 2017 01:58PM


Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: cinda ( )
Date: May 25, 2017 10:27PM

CZ, Thank you for that comprehensive explanation. You replied to Kathleen that your knowledge on this subject is from your own education/experience. I am very impressed and I must add that your retention of the information(in particular, from an education standpoint) is far more comprehensive than my own, on most any given subject.

Very informative post, thanks again :)

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Trails end ( )
Date: May 26, 2017 11:36AM

Well stated CZ Hie etc..long term benefits or risks might be hard to assess as we are still in the infancy of constant exposure to this radiation and as stated its difficult to mount controlled study...i do know my eyes hurt after a few hours of screen watching be it computer or tv..glasses seem epidemic....if your stuck on your back for several months with nothing else to do youll know what i mean..seems those beside power lines feel something...most property beside power lines is hard to sell because of this belief...true or not...being beside windmills has now drawn attention perhaps due to the constant fluctuation of high low pressure...this property doesnt sell well either...its only a big deal if its you who is affected...too early to be definitive imo...remember the ozone layer disappearing in the seventies...havent heard a peep about it in years...science is ongoing and developing...i never would have believed id ever be exmormon twenty years ago...never say never...sorry kathleen ...theres just a ton we dont know...educated guesses is the best we got cuz the profit gets revelations about shopping...effects might be psychosomatic...but to those affected its still real..the mind is capable of all kinds of things...including showing you the stupidity of moism...but it can sure take a while...i do notice kids are nuts today...is that cell phones or just old age??...member when smoking was considered possibly healthy...or at least sexy??...eggs?...butter?...poly unsaturated fats?....meats bad no meat is great...who knows

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: Dave the Atheist ( )
Date: May 26, 2017 12:03PM

The key term is IONIZING radiation. cell phones are safe.

Options: ReplyQuote
Posted by: edzachery ( )
Date: May 26, 2017 02:31PM

Good point, Dave. It's the incredibly short wavelength, high-energy electromagnetic radiation (gamma rays, etc.) that is going to wreak havoc on the biological systems of us humans. Wavelength and energy of the photons are inversely proportional: radio waves, for instance, have relatively long wavelengths, and the energy of their photons is proportionally low (compared to the really dangerous gamma rays, etc...types of radiation).

Even the visible light that we can see is a (very) small portion of the electromagnetic spectrum, and the same wavelength/energy relationship applies to this portion of the spectrum. Generally speaking, it's the forms of radiation past the violet end of the visible spectrum (ultraviolet, x-rays, gamma rays, etc...) that are bad for us because they can cause ionization: there is so much energy in a photon of this kind of radiation that it can bring about very real effects to living systems. Not so much with the radiation off the red end of the visible light spectrum: infrared (heat), radio waves, etc.

For what it's worth...

-edzachery

Options: ReplyQuote
Go to Topic: PreviousNext
Go to: Forum ListMessage ListNew TopicSearchLog In


Screen Name: 
Your Email (optional): 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 ********    ******   ********   ********  **    ** 
 **     **  **    **  **     **  **        **   **  
 **     **  **        **     **  **        **  **   
 ********   **        **     **  ******    *****    
 **         **        **     **  **        **  **   
 **         **    **  **     **  **        **   **  
 **          ******   ********   **        **    **