It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by NERaptor
The actual test states "electromagnetic fields" were used. This isn't necessarily specific to Cell phones. With Cell phones, using hands-free might make that significantly less, but what about other areas in our every-day lives?
For example, using an EMF reader, my microwave puts out about 5 to 7 up to a couple feet from it. And this is considered ok by the FCC!
What about computer monitors, and everyother electric device that we use daily?
Should the FCC review thier guidelines? Should product manufacturers be forced to report the EMF emissions? This opens up so many questions above and beyond Cell phone use. Although, since we typically put the cell phone next to our heads, they deserve to be near the top of the list.
[edit on 20-12-2004 by NERaptor]
Originally posted by shots
Keep in mind when they claimed they caused cancer very few had cell phones now a great majority have more then one, yet we have seen no rise in brain cancer have we?
The radiation used in the study was at levels between a Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) of between 0.3 and 2 watts per kilogram. Most phones emit radio signals at SAR levels of between 0.5 and 1 W/kg.
SAR is a measure of the rate of radio energy absorption in body tissue, and the SAR limit recommended by the International Commission of Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection is 2 W/kg.
The study also measured other harmful effects on cells.
Because of the lab set-up, the researchers said the study did not prove any health risks. But they added that "the genotoxic and phenotypic effects clearly require further studies ... on animals and human volunteers."
Adlkofer advised against the use of a mobile phone when an alternative fixed line phone was available, and recommended the use of a headset connected to a cellphone whenever possible.
"We don't want to create a panic, but it is good to take precautions," he said, adding that additional research could take another four or five years.
Previous independent studies into the health effects of mobile phone radiation have found it may have some effect on the human body, such as heating up body tissue and causing headaches and nausea, but no study that could be independently repeated has proved that radiation had permanent harmful effects. [emphasis mine]
These researchers used up to twice the radiation than is emitted by cell phones and admit that their research does not prove harm caused by cell phones. I think the headset advice is good, not only from a safety standpoint, but from a practical one, as well, as I stated earlier.
I agree on the use of the headsets and wish they made their use manditory in cars to help prevent accidents.
I seldom use my cell since I retired, however my wife does and I got her a headset for her car just for safety reasons. Now if I can just get her to use it. You know what they say you can lead a horse to water, but you can't make them drink
I have one question though. Why would they use such high levels? That seems rather extreme, kind of like they do in some tests on medicine. The labels on the state take two tablets a day for up to 10 days, yet researchers took it for up to one year. It was at that time they found that problems started.
I only mentioned the above based on the latest regarding a warning that came out about Alieve (sp?). Geesh give me a break of course it might cause problems in some at those levels.
Now critics are calling for it to be removed from the markert because of those tests. Logic tells me rewording the label should be enough, unless of course further testing at lower doses produces similar results.