It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

US Patent #US 6506148 B2. -Nervous system manipulation by electromagnetic fields from monitors

page: 2
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:06 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen

Scientific American Thinks so

Your source (Did you read it?):

Evidence of health effects from EMF, including their influence on the brain, is inconclusive, and the probability that EMF exposure is a genuine health hazard is currently small.


At lower levels of exposure, evidence for specific effects that may occur as a result of direct neural interactions with radio frequency fields is sparse. In addition, many of the studies that claim provocative results have yet to be replicated by independent laboratories.


Replication of either the negative or positive effects of exposure on cognition is sorely lacking in the scientific literature and more work is required to verify and reconcile differences between studies reporting either contradictory or no effects.

www.scientificamerican.com...




posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: nonjudgementalist
Let me clarify: what did China make work which didn't work before they stole?




The peasants in the countryside?



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

if scientific american says inconclusive about something as touchy as that im convinced its true. unscientific, yes. but im not a scientist.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:11 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen

but im not a scientist.

Neither I am (professionally) but if that's the case it might be better to avoid attempting to bring science into it unless you understand it.

Reading your sources before posting them wouldn't hurt, either.




edit on 8/23/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

youre not jon lithgow either.

from the article

Amir Raz, assistant professor of clinical neuroscience at Columbia University, offers the following answer.
Definitely. Radiation is energy and research findings provide at least some information concerning how specific types may influence biological tissue, including that of the brain. In some cases the effect may be therapeutic. For example, transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) is a technique used to induce a short-term interruption of normal activity in a relatively restricted area of the brain by rapidly changing a strong magnetic field near the area of interest. Mark George provided a nice account of TMS in the September 2003 issue of Scientific American. In it he described how head-mounted wire coils can deliver powerful yet evanescent magnetic pulses directly into focal brain regions to painlessly modulate neural activity by inducing minute electric currents. Clinically, TMS may be helpful in alleviating certain symptoms, including those of depression.

Researchers typically differentiate between the effects of ionizing radiation (such as far-ultraviolet, X-ray and gamma ray) and nonionizing radiation (including visible light, microwave and radio). The ionizing variety may be undesirable because it can cause DNA damage and mutations, thus we should all limit our exposure to its sources--radioactive materials and solar radiation among them. However, given modern technology, nonionizing radiation from power lines, personal wireless devices, cell phone towers and other sources is practically unavoidable. Extremely low frequency electromagnetic fields (EMF) surround home appliances as well as high-voltage electrical transmission lines and transformers.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: dashen

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: nonjudgementalist
Let me clarify: what did China make work which didn't work before they stole?




The peasants in the countryside?
propoganda



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

so to recap.

i provided sources evidencing electromagnetic waves may alter physical and neural functions.
seems to be a solid ground to consider precisely modulated waves may affect specific brain functions.
you take one piece of one article, out of context, and say i dont read my sources. when the whole rest of the article seems to prove my point.
and somehow its on me to prove this patent works as promised?
classy.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:23 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen

youre not jon lithgow either.
Nor am I Emilio Lizardo. Are you a stainless steel ball bearing?


As to your quote; did you read it? Do you know the difference between a strong magnetic field and electromagnetic radiation? The author of the article seems to.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:26 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen



i provided sources evidencing electromagnetic waves may alter physical and neural functions.
No. You didn't.


when the whole rest of the article seems to prove my point.
No. It doesn't.




edit on 8/23/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:28 AM
link   
originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dashen

Are you a stainless steel ball bearing?



this is america sir, and with the will and the right plastic surgeon i can be whatever i like.

yes. electromagnetism and strong magnetic fields are different.
i posit they are related enough and both may have effects on neural and physical function.
you have provided nothing to deny that.
except witty retorts that is.
edit on 23-8-2015 by dashen because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:30 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen



you have provided nothing to deny that. except witty retorts that is.

And the article which you, yourself, linked.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

do we agree on the meaning of the word inconclusive?



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:32 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen

I don't know. It would seem to be the first time it's come up.
What's your definition?



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage

this works for me


in·con·clu·sive
ˌinkənˈklo͞osiv/Submit
adjective
not leading to a firm conclusion; not ending doubt or dispute.
"the medical evidence is inconclusive"


ergo, not disproving or proving, except that the rest of the article suggests positive results



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:42 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen

except that the rest of the article suggests positive results
You think that this suggests positive results? Seriously?

Replication of either the negative or positive effects of exposure on cognition is sorely lacking in the scientific literature and more work is required to verify and reconcile differences between studies reporting either contradictory or no effects.



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 03:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dashen

except that the rest of the article suggests positive results
You think that this suggests positive results? Seriously?

Replication of either the negative or positive effects of exposure on cognition is sorely lacking in the scientific literature and more work is required to verify and reconcile differences between studies reporting either contradictory or no effects.




inconclusive. we just did this. this reads to me as- some research says positive/negative effects. you see it too right?
and the beginning where the guy says that fields have an effect on mood.
yes, different voltage. but you read it right?

and hear this

and some of this



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 04:02 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen

this reads to me as- some research says positive/negative effects. you see it too right?
No. I see that it says replication of claims that there are positive or negative effects is "sorely lacking". That means that there is no reliable evidence of either case.


and the beginning where the guy says that fields have an effect on mood.
yes, different voltage.
No. Voltage has nothing to do with it. And, again, you do not seem to understand the difference between a strong magnetic field and electromagnetic radiation.



and some of this
Again, maybe you should actually read your sources:

The intervention magnetic field had no effect on sleep patterns, suggesting that this exposure may not be an important factor in predicting sleep of young women who sleep at home.

aje.oxfordjournals.org...



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 04:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage
The first article says intermittent signals do it but not steady.
the second study seems to confirm.
Curious
Magnetic fields and electric pulses both have neurological and other effects on the human body.
Do you deny that?



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 04:21 AM
link   
a reply to: dashen

The first article says intermittent signals do it but not steady.
the second study seems to confirm.
Curious
No. It's called science. That's what duplication of results is about.



Magnetic fields and electric pulses both have neurological and other effects on the human body. Do you deny that?

Put so broadly? No.
Stick your finger in a light socket. Guess what?
I've had a couple of MRIs though. Very powerful magnetic field. I didn't feel a thing; physical or otherwise.



edit on 8/23/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)

edit on 8/23/2015 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 23 2015 @ 05:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Phage
I have had 6 MRIs in the past 2 years. To avoid emotional pain , ask for a headset and tell them to put on some good New Orleans Jazz . Works wonders.





top topics



 
19
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join