HN Gopher Feed (2017-10-21) - page 1 of 10
5G Radiation Dangers (2016)
36 points by ashitlerferadhttp://beta.latimes.com/business/la-fi-cellphone-5g-health-20160...
ko27 - 59 minutes ago
If non-ionizing low temperature radiation can be harmful to humans,
does that mean we can get health issues just from standing near
another human body which emits EM radiation at a far higher
frequency and energy density?
manmal - 57 minutes ago
A human body emits more radiation in the gigahertz range than a
ko27 - 55 minutes ago
I am talking about the infrared range, which is above 300GHz.
manmal - 52 minutes ago
Interesting thought. Near infrared light does interact with
cells (photobiomodulation), usually in a beneficial way.
Maybe the wave form is another factor, or some frequency
ranges are beneficial while others are not?
hutzlibu - 37 minutes ago
"some frequency ranges are beneficial while others are
not"Certainly. Heat is nice (if not too much), but x-ray is
usually bad. Gamma-rays a lot worse. And cellphone
radiation is probably somewhere in between ... so like the
article cites: we don't know yet.So I do not like sleeping
next to my mobile nor have it next to lower body parts for
too long ...
thaumasiotes - 28 minutes ago
Heat is not a frequency or a frequency range.
jjoonathan - 41 minutes ago
Isn't there a pretty well-established (but small) link between
temperature and cancer?There's probably a reason why all the RF
cancer studies go to the effort of specifically controlling it
and specifying that the effects they are interested in are
CamperBob2 - 1 hours ago
Seriously? This again?There is no physical basis for the
hypothesis that non-ionizing radiation at athermal levels has any
effect on humans. So, either come up with some repeatable results,
or find something else to spend your research funding on.
hutzlibu - 33 minutes ago
They reported some results of a not yet published study. So if
you allready know everything, I hope you are open for some
questions about the base structure and maybe the great unifying
theory of the universe?
CamperBob2 - 29 minutes ago
There have been plenty of published studies with equally-
alarming results.The one thing that all of the studies have had
in common is that the effects they describe mysteriously
disappear as soon as someone tries to reproduce them.
_wmd - 52 minutes ago
Disappointing lack of specific information about the test setup, it
mentions a variety of configurations at varying energy levels, but
omits whether it was a single male/female pair in each
configuration or whatever elseI have no doubt our bodies are easily
disrupted by EM in ways we know about and probably many, many more
we don't, but it is insufficient to base a belief on "science said
male rats don't like 5g phones", which is basically all the article
CommentCard - 48 minutes ago
Link to the NTP's paper:
article is misleading. The paper it is based on studied the
effects of 900MHz CDMA modulated RF on rats. 5G bandwidth in the
U.S. is from roughly 3100 MHz to 4200 MHz.
zipotm - 51 minutes ago
My MacBook Air wireless spot is producing more than 40 Gauss!
valuearb - 1 hours ago
No discussion of sample sizes or P values? I convinced, I will
refuse to stand within inches of a 5G base station for 10 minutes
on, 10 minutes off, for 10 hours a day.
sschueller - 1 hours ago
I would be more worried about issues similar to the diesel gate
scandal where manufacturers start forging radiation tests
results.How much testing does the government do and how much is the
industry self testing?