Are cell towers & 5G making people sick? (9/11, compare, election)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Humans have evolved to be in the sun too, but everyone acknowledges radiation from the sun causes cancer.
See my article above.
The sun has just about every frequency, ultra-violet rays are damaging with constant exposure. I think people confuse ionizing radiation (Alpha, Beta, Gamma) with non-ionizing radiation such as microwaves. Microwaves can cause cataracts over time but never heard of anyone getting sick from cell towers. The workers should shut down the transmitters when they are in proximity but not residents a few hundred feet below shouldn't have an issue when live. People should be more concerned when they put a cell phone next to their head but I don't see that as an issue.
This is a good source for information, The Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers performs studies on many different sources.
Quote:
As to whether the millimeter wave bands are safe, Waterhouse explains that because RF from cellular sites is on the non-ionizing radiation spectrum, it's not the kind of radiation that could damage DNA and possibly cause cancer. The only known biological impact of RF on humans is heating tissue. Excessive exposure to RF causes a person's entire body to overheat to dangerous levels. Local exposure can damage skin tissue or corneas.
“The actual impact and the depth of penetration into the human body is less at higher frequencies," he says. “The advantage of that is your skin won't be damaged because millimeter waves will reflect off the skin's surface."
The sun has just about every frequency, ultra-violet rays are damaging with constant exposure. I think people confuse ionizing radiation (Alpha, Beta, Gamma) with non-ionizing radiation such as microwaves. Microwaves can cause cataracts over time but never heard of anyone getting sick from cell towers. The workers should shut down the transmitters when they are in proximity but not residents a few hundred feet below shouldn't have an issue when live.
This is a good source for information, The Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers performs studies on many different sources.
You would be best served being curious in life, versus dogmatic in your beliefs.
here is the way this works. A video is a thing that someone says and cant be verified. When done well you get all manner of insane things and people believe it.
Now give me a scientific paper that has been peer reviewed and published in a known scientific journal.... where the data is provided, then im all in!
video = getting bad information that cannot be verified. dont fall for nonsense. seek actual information.
here is the way this works. A video is a thing that someone says and cant be verified. When done well you get all manner of insane things and people believe it.
Now give me a scientific paper that has been peer reviewed and published in a known scientific journal.... where the data is provided, then im all in!
video = getting bad information that cannot be verified. dont fall for nonsense. seek actual information.
All information is actual information.
If you require information to be vetted for you {scientific process} then you maybe missing out on information. Sometimes, science is slow to catch up with the cause-mechanism of actions.
If you require information to be vetted for you, you also subject yourself to possible bias, censorship, etc. The Peer Review process is notoriously hijacked by special interests.
Quote:
Nobel Prize winner calls peer review “very distorted,” “completely corrupt,” and “simply a regression to the mean”
[...]
And of course all the academics say we’ve got to have peer review. But I don’t believe in peer review because I think it’s very distorted and as I’ve said, it’s simply a regression to the mean.
I think peer review is hindering science. In fact, I think it has become a completely corrupt system. It’s corrupt in many ways, in that scientists and academics have handed over to the editors of these journals the ability to make judgment on science and scientists.
[..]
[https://retractionwatch.com/2014/03/...n-to-the-mean/
What you want is not to think for yourself, and let others think for you. You think there is something called a Peer Review process where this happens, but instead, all scientists at the end of the day are their own human beings with their own biases and very importantly: vices.
Did you know big pharma and other companies often pay off the editors of these journals millions of dollars to control what these companies publish?
Unfortunately, there is no short cut, you need to think for yourself.
here is the way this works. A video is a thing that someone says and cant be verified. When done well you get all manner of insane things and people believe it.
Now give me a scientific paper that has been peer reviewed and published in a known scientific journal.... where the data is provided, then im all in!
video = getting bad information that cannot be verified. dont fall for nonsense. seek actual information.
The problem with this though, Ferd, is that everything in medicine begins with someone saying something that cannot be verified. And then more people saying the same thing, which also cannot be verified. And once it impacts a lot of people, then research will be conducted, a paper written, peer review done, and it's published in some reputable journal with a note stating more research needs to be done.
I like listening to anecdotal evidence because I don't want to wait around for research to catch up. Without going into the specifics publicly, I was cured of a disease more than 20 years ago that I had for 30 plus years, because some doctor noticed something in his patients, connected the dots, and started treating them, and I was lucky enough to find him. He continued treating people, keeping data, and wrote papers that were published in medical journals. From there, some doctors in the US and in other countries tried to disprove what he was saying, and found he was right. So they're also curing their patients. What did big pharma do? They funded a study, changed the protocol, and then declared they were unable to duplicate his findings. Why did they do this? Because the disease is one of the biggest cash cows for big pharma.
You do you, of course, but I'm not waiting around.
The minimum safe distance as shown in our video, is between 15 to 20 feet. The Austrian Medical Association, The International Institute of Building Biologists, The BioInitiative Report and The FCC all have exposure guidelines.
That's for a wifi router. The power of a 5G tower is much greater obviously. Anyway, this refers to a video that gives information but no link for the video is given. Sometimes when I am too lazy to read stuff, I prefer to listen to a video instead but anyone can make a video and say all kinds of made up stuff. But some folks making information videos actually give their sources.
Then again;
Quote:
Both 5GHz and 2.4GHz WiFi are 100% safe for human, the signal does not harm in any way. It is perfectly safe. Term “radiation” is often used to scare people.
Being non-ionizing, the 5G radiation can only heat whatever absorbs it. Exactly how much heating can a tiny radio transmitter cause? Maybe if it is concentrated enough it might overheat one's cornea and cause cataracts in the long term. Is that even possible? https://ask.imeshforce.com/en/articl...on-2-4ghz-only
Quote:
For US customers, the message from FCC: For wireless devices operating at or below 6 GHz......., the allowable FCC SAR limit is 1.6 watts per kilogram.
(Wireless routers usually under 0.02 watts per KG)
So it would seem there is no danger from 5G. Not from WiFi transmitters anyway. I can see being up too close to a cell tower antennae could be a problem. But one would have to be right up with one's head near the antennae. These antennae are designed to radiate horizontally so there would be no intense radiation on the ground near a tower.
here is the way this works. A video is a thing that someone says and cant be verified. When done well you get all manner of insane things and people believe it.
Now give me a scientific paper that has been peer reviewed and published in a known scientific journal.... where the data is provided, then im all in!
video = getting bad information that cannot be verified. dont fall for nonsense. seek actual information.
There are people who work in these industries with experience in the RF industry (in this case).
One of the jobs in the past was a broadcast engineer for a radio network. I don't know 5G, but I do know general high power RF safety. And from what I heard on the video, these workers don't know what they are doing around these antennas.
I guess that ultimately, you have to choose in whom you trust.
I posted a link how incidences of leukemia in children were shown to correlate with exposure to powerlines, also a source of none-ionizing radiation.
I don't see any medical proof that non-ionizing radiation can cause cancer. Claims come up frequently related to power lines but they are very low level. We have a large transmission line passing right next to a school and some claimed it was causing cancer. The power company rerouted the line temporarily so measurements could be taken inside the school, the levels were actually higher due to the power source from the school.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
