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.
Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by Spruk
Yeah as far as GENETIC defects yes. There is too little even known about the young science of genetics to say either way.
There is a proven link between these frequencies and cancer. That is why the world health organization to name one group has warned us to limit our cell phone use and to not build power lines in residential areas.
Search for those studies that these concerns are based off and make sure the are not funded by lobbyists or utility companies.
These issues associated with high and low frequency emissions are not new to us and have laws already for their regulation in many communities across the world.
Also the carbon emissions issue should not be ignored. The plans for further taxation based of fictitious numbers generated in a digital format we do not control is unacceptable.
That is also why they are being pushed even though the technologies they are supposedly being implemented for don't yet exist.
edit on 7-2-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)
en.wikipedia.org...
Biological hazards
The best understood biological effect of electromagnetic fields is to cause dielectric heating. For example, touching or standing around an antenna while a high-power transmitter is in operation can cause severe burns. These are exactly the kind of burns that would be caused inside a microwave oven.
This heating effect varies with the power and the frequency of the electromagnetic energy. A measure of the heating effect is the specific absorption rate or SAR, which has units of watts per kilogram (W/kg). The IEEE and many national governments have established safety limits for exposure to various frequencies of electromagnetic energy based on SAR, mainly based on ICNIRP Guidelines,which guard against thermal damage.
There are publications which support the existence of complex biological effects of weaker non-thermal electromagnetic fields (see Bioelectromagnetics), including weak ELF magnetic fieldsand modulated RF and microwave fields. Fundamental mechanisms of the interaction between biological material and electromagnetic fields at non-thermal levels are not fully understood.
A 2009 study at the University of Basel in Switzerland found that intermittent (but not continuous) exposure of human cells to a 50 Hz electromagnetic field at a flux density of 1 mT (or 10 G) induced a slight but significant increase of DNA fragmentation in the Comet assay. However that level of exposure is already above current established safety exposure limits.
[edit]Positions of governments and scientific bodies
World Health Organization
In May 2011, the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer published a review of the evidence on health risks of electromagnetic fields (EMFs), and concluded that there was limited evidence that cellphone users might be at increased risk of glioma and acoustic neuroma, and that there was inadequate evidence of any other health risks posed by EMF.This "possibly carcinogenic" classification was often misinterpreted, meaning only "that there is very little scientific evidence as to the carcinogenicity of cell phone use".
Conclusions
Dr Jonathan Samet (University of Southern California, USA), overall Chairman of the Working
Group, indicated that "the evidence, while still accumulating, is strong enough to support a
conclusion and the 2B classification. The conclusion means that there could be some risk, and
therefore we need to keep a close watch for a link between cell phones and cancer risk."
"Given the potential consequences for public health of this classification and findings," said IARC
Director Christopher Wild, "it is important that additional research be conducted into the long‐
term, heavy use of mobile phones. Pending the availability of such information, it is important
to take pragmatic measures to reduce exposure such as hands‐free devices or texting. "
blogs.nature.com...
At first a civil court ruled against Marcolini, who appealed. The Appeal Court placed more weight on research done by Lennart Hardell’s group at the University of Örebro in Sweden, which years ago suggested that the use of mobile phones for more than ten years leads to increased risk for acoustic neuroma and glioma.
The Appeal Court considered this work more “reliable” and more “independent” than large international studies such as the Interphone study (conducted by the International Agency for Research on Cancer and funded jointly by the industry and the European Commission), as Hardell’s studies were not funded by mobile-phone manufacturers. The Interphone study, published in 2010, failed to provide solid evidence that mobile phones increased the risk of brain tumours, although it hinted at a slightly higher risk for ‘heavy’ users (see ‘No link found between mobile phones and cancer’).
A further appeal from INAIL brought the case in front of the High Court, which has confirmed the Appeal Court’s decision and ruled once again in favour of Marcolini. The sentence is now final. Italian consumer advocacy organizations, such as CODACONS, celebrated the ruling, which they say will create a precedent that allows consumers who use mobile phones for many hours a day to sue mobile-phone manufacturers if they develop a tumour.
Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by snowspirit
They wont cut your power for using "too much" they want to charge you for excess usage...you irresponsible enemy of all that is ecological.....want more taxes to feed big business ....then fight for these things to go nationwide so they can set limits to your usage, after which only the super rich will be able to keep living in the 21st century.
try more than ONE source if you are going to TRY and debunk decades of research by agencies, organizations, and universities across the planet.
Also even the world health organization has said what I stated. BUT hey I guess they need people like you with your one source to set them straight.
(Previous link)
Lyon, France, May 31, 2011 ‐‐ The WHO/International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) has classified radiofrequency electromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans (Group 2B), based on an increased risk for glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer1, associated with wireless phone use.
"Anotation 2: 'Limited evidence of carcinogenicity': A positive association has been observed between exposure to the agent
and cancer for which a causal interpretation is considered by the Working Group to be credible, but chance, bias or
confounding could not be ruled out with reasonable confidence."
000632-99-5 Magenta 2B 57, 99, 100F 2012
Magenta production 1 57, 99, 100F 2012
Magnetic fields, extremely low-frequency 2B 80 2002
Magnetic fields, static 3 80 2002
World Health Organization
In May 2011, the WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer published a review of the evidence on health risks of electromagnetic fields (EMFs), and concluded that there was limited evidence that cellphone users might be at increased risk of glioma and acoustic neuroma, and that there was inadequate evidence of any other health risks posed by EMF.[10][11] This "possibly carcinogenic" classification was often misinterpreted, meaning only "that there is very little scientific evidence as to the carcinogenicity of cell phone use".[12]
* Health Canada
"There is no conclusive evidence of any harm caused by exposures [to electric and magnetic fields] at levels found in Canadian homes and schools, including those located just outside the boundaries of power line corridors."[13]
* U.S. military definition
In Federal Standard 1037C, the United States government adopts the following definition:
Electromagnetic radiation hazards (RADHAZ or EMR hazards): Hazards caused by a transmitter/antenna installation that generates electromagnetic radiation in the vicinity of ordnance, personnel, or fueling operations in excess of established safe levels or increases the existing levels to a hazardous level; or a personnel, fueling, or ordnance installation located in an area that is illuminated by electromagnetic radiation at a level that is hazardous to the planned operations or occupancy. These hazards will exist when an electromagnetic field of sufficient intensity is generated to: (a) induce or otherwise couple currents or voltages large enough to initiate electroexplosive devices or other sensitive explosive components of weapon systems, ordnance, or explosive devices; (b) cause harmful or injurious effects to humans and wildlife; (c) create sparks having sufficient magnitude to ignite flammable mixtures of materials that must be handled in the affected area. —Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms
, its classification? 2A (Probably carcinogenic).
Biomass fuel (primarily wood), indoor emissions from
household combustion of
the 2b classification is not for its NON risk. It is for the lack of evidence. Please look up a 2b classifications for cancinageans.
If there was NO risk it would not get a 2b classification. It is classified as such as there is concern for it but since it is still being tested they cannot be sure.
If they were sure that NO risk was associated they would say so. THEY CAN NOT. Also REAL independent studies NOT funded by cell phone manufactures have proven that there is a real risk.
www.fda.gov...
IARC Classification
Group 1
Sufficient evidence in humans or
sufficient evidence in animals and
strong mechanistic data in humans
Group 2A Limited evidence in humans and
sufficient evidence in animals
Group 2B Limited evidence in humans and less
than sufficient evidence in animals
Group 3 Inadequate in humans and
inadequate or limited in animals
Group 4 Lack of carcinogenicity in humans
and in animals
Originally posted by zedVSzardoz
reply to post by Spruk
It emits dangerous levels of radiation.
It is part of the carbon emission scam where people will be taxed in the future for going over their allotted "carbon points". Agenda 21 at work.
It has SERIOUS health concerns associated with it. It also is jam packed with ease dropping technologies.
It is the equivalent of having a dozen cell phones strapped to your head and sending high frequency signals 24/7.
It is known to cause cancer and a whole host of other health issues.
edit on 7-2-2013 by zedVSzardoz because: (no reason given)