[rickcr42]

Quote:

We're all going to die a horrible death anyway so just listen to your headphones and relax.

I was wondering why my headphone band had to be adjusted "up" a size every six months.
I thought I was maybe just getting smarter so my cranium size was adjusting to make room for the additional grey matter but now with this new development I am wondering if maybe I had it wrong.

Nah !

 

[jagorev]

Quote:

Originally Posted by muckshot Just thought I'd resurrect this thread to see if there are any more opinions on EMF & health. I'm of the opinion that until EMF is proven safe, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that at least some cautionary steps ought to be taken. Of course there are many other sources of electromagnetic radiation that most of us are exposed to everyday, but I can't being a bit pessimitic when the argument seems to be "well, it hasn't been proven harmful and everyone seems OK, so it's nothing to be concerned about".

I think this precautionary principle is a little silly. If we wanted everything to be proven safe beyond a shadow of doubt, there'd be no progress or technology. Everything in life has risks. We still drive cars, fly airplanes, drink alcohol, play sports...even though all of these carry a much higher chance of death and injury than listening to headphones. We don't worry constantly when we do those activities.

The burden of evidence lies here, not on the technology, but the one making a claim that we need to be cautious. Before I see an example that headphones are dangerous (and I've seen millions of examples where they clearly aren't), I'm going to assume they're safe. That's just Occam's razor at work.

This argument is analogous to saying: "I'm of the opinion that until reading books is proven safe, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that at least some cautionary steps ought to be taken." Silly when there is no evidence of danger.

Basically, you can't scientifically prove a negative. You can't prove the non-existence of danger.

 

[muckshot]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jagorev I think this precautionary principle is a little silly. If we wanted everything to be proven safe beyond a shadow of doubt, there'd be no progress or technology... The burden of evidence lies here, not on the technology, but the one making a claim that we need to be cautious. Before I see an example that headphones are dangerous (and I've seen millions of examples where they clearly aren't), I'm going to assume they're safe. That's just Occam's razor at work.

Listen, I hear you on this and was figured my post would generate this kind of response, give the way I worded it. In many senses I agree with you, being overly cautious would be an impediment to progress. But the mere fact that this "issue" keeps resurfacing in the media (Slashdot has postings on cell phone research regularly) and watchdog groups continually call for further research (many of whom pay for their own studies out of pocket) indicates to me that there is no consensus and some caution can only be regarded as an intelligent approach. History is ripe with examples of dangerous technologies and drugs that were deemed 'not harmful' and given an A-OK for use, only to be later retracted following the evidence generated by a human death toll. I'm not trying to be alarmis or convince anyone that headphones are dangerous or that cell phones ought not be used, I'm just interested in hearing what people think about the "controversy".

Quote:

Originally Posted by jagorev This argument is analogous to saying: "I'm of the opinion that until reading books is proven safe, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that at least some cautionary steps ought to be taken." Silly when there is no evidence of danger.

Try telling that to Stalin

 

[XXhalberstramXX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Anarchy965 Firstly, thanks to allenf for clearing up the rediculous magnetic feild confusion once and for all: Secondly the microwaves from cellphones(even if they are the same frequency and wavelength range on the electromagnetic spectrum as the microwaves from a microwave oven) are NOT a health risk or cancer causing because the amount of energy in an electromagnetic wave is based not only on its wavelength an frequency but also on its amplitude. The amplitude of a cellphone's microwaves is much lower than those of a microwave oven causing them to be about as hazardous as Radio waves(the lowest and least dangerous frequency range of the electromagnetic spectrum)

Allow me to add: Amplitude is basically a measure of how many quanta of light (photons) are being produced. The energy of each quantum of light, on the other hand, is given by the frequency. The reason why UV rays are harmful and visible light or radio waves are not is (to the best of my knowledge) because UV rays have an energy high enough to alter human DNA, resulting in mutations, cancer, etc. The reason microwaves cook your food and could (theoretically - if you got too close to a heavy duty radio tranciever) cook your brain is because the alternating electric field stimulates oscillation in various polar molecules (such as water). This oscillation causes friction which in turn causes heat.
As far as I know, no amount of microwave radiation is likely to cause cancer because each photon has too low of an energy to cause any transformation of the genetic material in your cells. Furthermore, it is extremely unlikely that there could be a simultaneous excitation from multiple microwave frequency photons so as to produce the higher energy needed for cell mutation (especially since a UV photon is somewhere around ten hundred million times as energetic as a microwave photon). So although it may cause a slight warming effect (there are reports that you can cook an egg using two cell phones), it is unlikely to cause cancer or any other such ill effect.

 

[XXhalberstramXX]

oh yeah. also, you can basically never (with science) prove something safe. You can perhaps prove something is harmful, but proving something is safe is like proving that you never cheated on a spouse. Its next to impossible (how do you prove you haven't done anything -- you cannot prove the non-existence of an object or event)

this is related to why intelligent design is a farce. You're trying to prove that there is no natural explanation (and that therefore there must be a supernatural explanation). How do you prove that an explanation does NOT exist (and never will exist)?

 

[rickcr42]

Technology in general is not safe because it is not a natural state for humans.We worry about cell phones and headphones yet daily we are bomabarded with the entire spectrum of waves and eat food so pumped up with steroids I am surprised everyone does not look like Arnold.

For every "natural" disease there is a counterbalance,a natural cure in nature but because our diseases are man made so must the cure be.The species is relying way too much on machines and i wonder just how many would survive if an air detonation took out everything from the pulse in the dead of winter.When the power grid goes silent and the toys go dark do civilised humans still have the skills to survive by sheer will and instinct alone or would they instead huddle together in the cold dark and wait for someone to "fix it" because they lost the "I can and will dammit"

 

[Cake]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickcr42 The species is relying way too much on machines and i wonder just how many would survive of an air detonation took out everything from the pulse in the dead of winter.When the power grid goes silent and the toys go dark do civilised humans still have the skills to survive by sheer will and instinct alone or would they instead huddle together in the cold dark and wait for someone to "fix it" because they lost the "I can and will dammit"

Do you read Philip K. Dick? This reminded me of his short story "Pay For The Printer." It's an interesting look at humans in the throes of technology withdrawal. Highly recommended.

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

Do you read Philip K. Dick?

Doesn't everyone ?

Relying on "gadgets" is way different from using the tools available for convenience which is what I do.I understand technology but am not a "tech head" in the sense that I must have certain things or life as I know it comes to an end.
The recent Blackberry fiasco was a prime example of idiots with adult toys.The patent holder sued the manufacturer and it was real close to a "cease operations" order until the present comprimise was worked out.The comical part was all the panic when certain persons who have come to totally rely on the device thought they may lose the use of and you would think by the outcry someone was talking about taking their breathable air away !

These things are AIDS,tools, are not essential and it is my personal opinion that some folks feel a need to not only have certain items but once in their posession an imperitive need to use them as often as possible.

witness the cell phone.The fact that most humans in the civilised world have one means more often than not they are on the phone talking to someone yet before this "convenience" they seemed to get along just fine making far less phone calls and in fact life took a slower pace because you could actually avoid being bugged 24/7 because it is known you have a cell phone.

I turn mine off unless I need to make a call and if I don't want to answer my "missed calls" I don't.I feel the cell phone has made it seem to some like there is an obligation to talk to every human that calls even though most of the calls meaningless or unimportant "jabber" so like my home phone and caller I.D. I screen calls and talk to who I choose when I choose and if that pisses someone off so be it.maybe next time they will take the hint and leave me alone .

On the radiated magnetics/are headphones or cell phones dangerous front :

If they are not then they should be,maybe even a built in timer that sends a pulse into your temple after a certain amount of "in use" time if only just to get people to step away once in a while.To actually have a life not involving being attached to one electronic device or another every waking moment of the day or they get withdrawals from the lack of

 

[JJ15k]

My take on the EM issues with cellphones (which would be far more harmful than headphones anyway) is that with reasonnable use there isn t much risk or we would already have noticed it, at least i hope. Now when you see some people GLUED to their phone I can believe they finish by cooking their(or what was already left of it) brains.

About what rick said, in my experience some people nowadays expect you to call back every time they try to reach you and that can be annoying at times.I do the same thing as you but when you finally get to talk to them it can get annoying

(i like to be left alone sometimes, so sue me)
Thanks for the reading suggestions btw.

 

[Purgatos]

I'm quite sure that cell phones do not put out any form of damaging RF, too low frequency to actually cause cell damage.

 

[rickcr42]

I dunno man.

there seems to be some kind of connection between the dumbing down of humans in general and the rise of electronic toys that I am not sure can be blamed on reliance alone.

there is also a certain offbeat segment of human medicine that touts magnets as being useful for some human ailments if used correctly and if there IS a correct way then it follows there must also be an incorrect way and that must be BAD.

Magnetism is a natural event,microwaves and radio transmissions are not so who is to say what is and is not damaging ? Kinda seems to me we are told one thing until we start dropping like flies or have a high birth defect rate then they come back and say "disregard what we said before" as if nothing of importance happened.

Ever see the old DDT/Insecticide commercials where a guy is standing in a cloud of the stuff in a t-shirt and jeans while the announcer goes on to say "totally safe for humans but DEADLY to those nasty old bugs in the garden "

 

[Purgatos]

People have always been idiots, electronic goods just allow us to broadcast idiocy to a wider audience.

 

[JJ15k]

I would agree with purgatos, you are too pessimistic rick

 

[XXhalberstramXX]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickcr42 Magnetism is a natural event,microwaves and radio transmissions are not so who is to say what is and is not damaging ? garden "

you are misinformed, my friend. Radio waves are produced in abundance by the sun. What do you think the static is that you hear on your radio when you're not tuned to a channel? Oh, and let it be known that radio waves and microwaves are basically the same thing. not much difference there.

 

[rickcr42]

Quote:

you are misinformed, my friend. Radio waves are produced in abundance by the sun. What

but not focused or at the same wavelenghts as humans use for radio transmissions.One is natural and a thing the species has adapted to and the other man made and thus needs a man made fix for any harm done

evolution of the species and adaptability in response to a NATURAL environment and that over time not measured in mere decades