If the phone has a strong wifi signal but a very poor cell signal, will it emit a lot of RF still?
A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit
121–130 of 171 posts
Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes but so does human intuition and its a heck of a lot faster. A healthy person can endure a toxic environment. An unhealthy person becomes more unhealthy from increased toxicity. I’m not saying electromagnetic radiation makes a healthy person unwell i’m saying it delays or worsens recovery of some unhealthy people and there are million different subsets of unhealthy people so which subset are you going to run the d…
Placebos in truth's clothing are toxins of human society. Please verify placebo vs truth before spreading, k? Thanks. > Two weeks of camping is an effective insomnia treatment Or two weeks away from the grind reduces stress. Or getting away from artificial lights/schedules reduces stress. Or it selects for people+times with less stressed. Or more healthy. Or higher SES. Or you're getting away from pollution. Or you n…
I think you are uncomfortable that some phenomena particularly biological don't fit in a scientific experiment neatly and are more comfortable labelling 3% of the population hypochondriacs to alleviate your own anxiety.
What I've stated is that I experienced increased fatigue from exposure to ER while I was seriously ill and had elevated serum ferritin.
Each ferritin molecule has 4500 iron atoms and serrin ferritin increases with acute or chronic viral infections. A healthy level is less than fifty. So a 1150 times increase in iron atoms in someone's blood could plausibly cause fatigue when it absorbs er.
Who does this cause anxiety in exactly?
How is turning off electronic devices going to cause anxiety?
People can turn them off. If it helps great. If it doesn't don't bother.
No anxiety necessary.
You might be better educated than me, better connected than me and more intelligent but there's something to be said for original thought. I'd love to take you up on your bet where you impolitely just called me a whinger. I think I'm smarter than you are just sayin there wasn't one insightful thing in your comment as you tried to apply a method that doesn't really fit the situation. How do we do this? Let's bet our hacker News anonymous reputations on it.
Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit
#123To everyone who keeps repeating "it's non-ionizing radiation, so any other effect than thermal is impossible": 1. saying something is impossible is not a scientific statement 2. RF is capable of specifically affecting enzyme reactions, random example: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2014/nr/c4nr0...
[deleted]
Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit
#124To everyone who keeps repeating "it's non-ionizing radiation, so any other effect than thermal is impossible": 1. saying something is impossible is not a scientific statement 2. RF is capable of specifically affecting enzyme reactions, random example: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2014/nr/c4nr0...
This ignores the primary issue of needing empirical evidence before claiming discovery. If non-ionizing radiation of a certain level is hazardous then it is provable. Affecting enzyme reactions is an observed effect, but what is the health risk?
Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit
#125I was confused by the "3.8W/kg" number. This Chi Trib article helped: it details "the federal safety limit, which is 1.6 watts per kilogram averaged over one gram of tissue."
and explains how a former Qualcomm engineer did the testing.
[0] https://www.chicagotribune.com/investigations/ct-cell-phone-...
Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit
#126EMR meters measure Volts/meter (V/m), milliwatts per square meter (mW/m²), and milliGauss (mG).
How do you convert to watts/kilogram?
Maybe measure the surface of my cross-section, multiply by mW/m², divide by my weight?
I have a Cornet ED88T, a GQ-390, and a Tenmars on order.
Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit
#127If the only possible negative effect is "burns", then it's easy to verify that people all over the world aren't getting burned by their phones, no? Testing and standards are still important, but it doesn't sound like there's some nefarious hidden effect we may just not know about.
Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Placebos in truth's clothing are toxins of human society. Please verify placebo vs truth before spreading, k? Thanks. > Two weeks of camping is an effective insomnia treatment Or two weeks away from the grind reduces stress. Or getting away from artificial lights/schedules reduces stress. Or it selects for people+times with less stressed. Or more healthy. Or higher SES. Or you're getting away from pollution. Or you n…
I think you are uncomfortable that some phenomena particularly biological don't fit in a scientific experiment neatly and are more comfortable labelling 3% of the population hypochondriacs to alleviate your own anxiety. What I've stated is that I experienced increased fatigue from exposure to ER while I was seriously ill and had elevated serum ferritin. Each ferritin molecule has 4500 iron atoms and serrin ferritin i…
Are you unfamiliar with how powerful the placebo effect is? Totally meaningless "treatments" can have real biological impacts, simply because the person receiving them believes it will.
If you truly cared about this topic, I assume you would want to know if the effect is real, or just your mind playing a trick on you.
Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit
#129To everyone who keeps repeating "it's non-ionizing radiation, so any other effect than thermal is impossible": 1. saying something is impossible is not a scientific statement 2. RF is capable of specifically affecting enzyme reactions, random example: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2014/nr/c4nr0...
This ignores the primary issue of needing empirical evidence before claiming discovery. If non-ionizing radiation of a certain level is hazardous then it is provable. Affecting enzyme reactions is an observed effect, but what is the health risk?
We don't know yet, so.. better safe than sorry, no?
Re: A radio frequency exposure test finds an iPhone 11 Pro exceeds the FCC's limit
#130Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4676010/ Essentially EM fields alternating in the low to medium frequency bands (~100khz-1mhz) can disrupt cell processes by physically jiggling the polar molecules that make up portions of miotic spindles/microtubules. Among presumably other things this effect is being investigated as a cancer fighting mechanism called 'tumor treating fields'. The carrier frequency of mob…
Oh bull. There is no way to prove RF modifies microtubules.
This seems false on its face. Surely that would be a straightforward experiment.