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.
I'm not afraid of casual cell phone use at all, but I wouldn't mash my phone against my ear for hours a day based on the data I've seen, which is usually in violation of the owner's manual instructions anyway.
Originally posted by wujotvowujotvowujotvo
The documentary isn't unscientific
There are several reasons I didn't mention the base stations. The math says the highest exposure comes from the cell phone:
Originally posted by Pilot
What about people who live near the masts where cancer clusters appear? Average people don't have a choice in the matter do they? There is no protection from a tower 1000 yards from your house.
Here are some "back of the envelope" (meaning "rough") numbers. Most cell phones are less than 2 watts and most towers are less than 100 watts, but let's pick worst case and use those numbers. My cell phone has a stubby little antenna, which is probably a worse design for concentrating exposure than say an iPhone which spreads it out a bit since the antenna surrounds the phone. So using my worst case, and holding the phone 1cm from my head which is about the minimum distance recommended by some owners manuals,
Because base stations operate at less than 100 watts, the radiation at ground level is much weaker than a cell phone due to the power relationship appropriate for that design of antenna.
Does the math explain why I'm not worried about the towers, compared to the cell phones? I admitted there may be at least some risk of heavy cell phone use and outlined some ways to mitigate this risk. There are numerous studies that don't correlate this risk so I thought I was being a bit cautious, rather than downplaying the risk.
Someone needs to be alert to the dangers of this technology, and if your all want to downplay the danger that's fine. Let others do the worrying for you.
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
But as I said before, there's no harm applying some caution, as you apparently are doing.
Since I've spent a lot of time on airplanes that's one source of extra radiation that concerned me. I took a job handling radioactive materials, which apparently some people would never consider doing, but I don't think I ever got nearly as much extra radiation from my job as I did from flying. Of course I had lots of training for handling radioactive material, and I had to wear one of those dosimeter badges to measure how much I was getting nuked, but I was never that paranoid about low radiation levels since I know they occur naturally, and anything natural is good, right? (said with tongue in cheek thinking about naturally occurring supernovae and GRBs, OK maybe not everything natural is good, not even stepping on a natural stonefish ).
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Yeah, I'm slightly paranoid, I guess -- I took a class in dosimetry and radiation protection when I was in college, so I guess a few notions stuck.
Too bad. If you were a "Resonant Being of Frequency", you would know that the commercial AC power in the US operates at so close to the Schumann resonance of 59.9 Hz that being exposed to a natural resonant frequency like this would surely make you feel good, if the woo in the video is to be believed. I must not be one either, since the last time I accidentally contacted an AC power the nearly 59.9 Hz natural frequency didn't make me feel good at all.
The caution that I practice does not means that I am a "Resonant Being of Frequency" LOL.
Originally posted by Arbitrageur
Since I've spent a lot of time on airplanes that's one source of extra radiation that concerned me. I took a job handling radioactive materials, which apparently some people would never consider doing
Originally posted by buddhasystem
Yeah, I'm slightly paranoid, I guess -- I took a class in dosimetry and radiation protection when I was in college, so I guess a few notions stuck.
Of course I had lots of training for handling radioactive material, and I had to wear one of those dosimeter badges to measure how much I was getting nuked
I know they occur naturally, and anything natural is good, right?
I'm pretty sure ionizing radiation is tearing things up
Too bad. If you were a "Resonant Being of Frequency", you would know that the commercial AC power in the US operates at so close to the Schumann resonance of 59.9 Hz that being exposed to a natural resonant frequency like this would surely make you feel good
I must not be one either, since the last time I accidentally contacted an AC power the nearly 59.9 Hz natural frequency didn't make me feel good at all.
Sci Total Environ. 2011 Sep 1;409(19):3649-65. Epub 2011 Jul 13.
Mortality by neoplasia and cellular telephone base stations in the Belo Horizonte municipality, Minas Gerais state, Brazil.
Adilza C. Dode a,b,e,⁎, Mônica M.D. Leão c, Francisco de A.F. Tejo d, Antônio C.R. Gomes e, Daiana C. Dode e, f,
Michael C. Dode e, Cristina W. Moreira b, Vânia A. Condessa b, Cláudia Albinatti b, Waleska T. Caiaffa g
a Minas Methodist University Center Izabela Hendrix, Belo Horizonte City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil
b Municipal Government of Belo Horizonte, Municipal Health Department, Belo Horizonte City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil
c UFMG—Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais-Belo Horizonte, Environmental and Sanitary Engineering Department, Belo Horizonte City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil
d UFCG—Universidade Federal de Campina Grande, Center of Electrical Engineering and Informatics, Academic Unit of Electrical Engineering, Paraíba State, Brazil
e MRE Engenharia (Electromagnetic Radiations Measurement—Engineering), Belo Horizonte City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil
f Faculty of Medical Sciences, Medicine-Belo Horizonte, Belo Horizonte City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil
g UFMG—Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais-Belo Horizonte, Urban Health Observatory, Belo Horizonte City, Minas Gerais State, Brazil
Abstract
Pollution caused by the electromagnetic fields (EMFs) of radio frequencies (RF) generated by the telecommunication system is one of the greatest environmental problems of the twentieth century. The purpose of this research was to verify the existence of a spatial correlation between base station (BS) clusters and cases of deaths by neoplasia in the Belo Horizonte municipality, Minas Gerais state, Brazil, from 1996 to 2006 and to measure the human exposure levels to EMF where there is a major concentration of cellular telephone transmitter antennas. A descriptive spatial analysis of the BSs and the cases of death by neoplasia identified in the municipality was performed through an ecological-epidemiological approach, using georeferencing. The database employed in the survey was composed of three data banks: 1. death by neoplasia documented by the Health Municipal Department; 2. BSs documented in ANATEL ("Agência Nacional de Telecomunicações": 'Telecommunications National Agency'); and 3. census and demographic city population data obtained from official archives provided by IBGE ("Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística": 'Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics'). The results show that approximately 856 BSs were installed through December 2006. Most (39.60%) of the BSs were located in the "Centro-Sul" ('Central-Southern') region of the municipality. Between 1996 and 2006, 7191 deaths by neoplasia occurred and within an area of 500 m from the BS, the mortality rate was 34.76 per 10,000 inhabitants. Outside of this area, a decrease in the number of deaths by neoplasia occurred. The greatest accumulated incidence was 5.83 per 1000 in the Central-Southern region and the lowest incidence was 2.05 per 1000 in the Barreiro region. During the environmental monitoring, the largest accumulated electric field measured was 12.4 V/m and the smallest was 0.4 V/m. The largest density power was 40.78 μW/cm(2), and the smallest was 0.04 μW/cm(2).
Copyright © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
PMID: 21741680 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
(...)
3.6. Environmental monitoring of the electromagnetic field
The EMF results provided essential information for the assessment of
risks to the health of the exposed persons in the community. A total of
400 points were measured in the Central-Southern region in 2008,
where a major concentration of cellular telephony antennas was found.
The mean intensity of the measured electric field was 7.32 V/m, varying
from 0.4 to 12.4 V/m. It was common to find a stronger electric field at
locations above the ground. The BS frequency bands ranged from
approximately 800 MHz to 1800MHz. In 2003, the power density
varied from 0.898 μW/cm2 to 3.066 μW/cm2.
(...)
According to the ICNIRP guidelines, the human levels to the public
at large (ICNIRP, 1998), for the frequency (f) band ranged from 400 to
2000 MHz, the electric field intensity E (V.m–1) equals 1.375 f ½ V/m,
which equals 1.375 √f V/m.
These values are according to the reference level patterns for the public
at large when compared with the current Brazilian federal law which
establishes the following limits: for a 900 MHz field intensity an electric
field of 41.25 V/m and a power density of 451.34 μW/cm2, for a 1800MHz
field intensity an electric field of 58.33 V/m and a power density of
902.49 μW/cm2. These human exposure limits are exclusively based on
thermal effects.
In 2003, the largest electric field found during environmental
monitoring of the BSs was 3.4 V/m and the greatest power
density was 3.06 μW/cm2. In 2008, the largest electric field found
during environmental monitoring of the BSs was 12.4 V/m, and
the greatest power density was 40.78 μW/cm2 near the cellular
antennas in the 890 to 1800 MHz frequency band. These values
were much larger than those reported in the Netanya study
(approximately 0.53 μW/cm2). The smallest values found in the
measurements were a field intensity of 0.4 V/m and a power
density of 0.04 μW/cm2.
(...)
The measured values of the EMF, determined in 2008 and 2003,
were substantially below the values allowed by the Brazilian federal
law nr. 11934, May 5, 2009. Nevertheless, the values encountered in
this study surpassed the limits of human exposure adopted by many
other countries and cities in the world, including Italy (10 μW/cm2);
China (6.6 μW/cm2); Switzerland (4.2 μW/cm2); Paris, France (1 μW/
cm2); Salzburg, Austria (0.1 μW/cm2); and Porto Alegre, Brazil
(4.2 μW/cm2).
(...)
Originally posted by wujotvowujotvowujotvo
For microwatts, here are the ranges reported in the latest study.
This had thorough geospatial mapping.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21741680
www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969711005754
Can you imagine 821,890 people living in a 100 meter radius?
For example, for the 100-meter radius, the 3569 deaths were divided by the 821,890 estimated exposed subjects living inside that radius.
I don't know that to be true and there is a foundation for the limits they established. However, their guidelines do seem a bit too generous to me, and many parts of the world have adopted their own, more strict guidelines.
Originally posted by Mary Rose
This, in a nutshell, is the most important message of the documentary:
The guidelines of Porto Alegre, Brazil would require the 40 µW/cm² be reduced to less than 4.2, which they already meet in the central southern region for example:
The measured values of the EMF, determined in 2008 and 2003, were substantially below the values allowed by the Brazilian federal law nr. 11934, May 5, 2009. Nevertheless, the values encountered in this study surpassed the limits of human exposure adopted by many other countries and cities in the world, including Italy (10 μW/cm2); China (6.6 μW/cm2); Switzerland (4.2 μW/cm2); Paris, France (1 μW/cm2); Salzburg, Austria (0.1 μW/cm2); and Porto Alegre, Brazil (4.2 μW/cm2).
The Brazilian federal law is apparently over 100 times more generous than the Porto Alegre, Brazil limit.
A total of 400 points were measured in the Central-Southern region in 2008,where a major concentration of cellular telephony antennas was found.... the power density varied from 0.898 μW/cm2 to 3.066 μW/cm2
That seems generous, and it may not be a bad idea to adopt the Porto Alegre, Brazil limit across more of Brazil.
..the current Brazilian federal law which establishes the following limits: for a 900 MHz field intensity an electric field of 41.25 V/mand a power density of 451.34 μW/cm2, for a 1800MHz field intensity an electric field of 58.33 V/m and a power density of 902.49 μW/cm2. These human exposure limits are exclusively based on thermal effects.