John Smith wrote:
You wrote:

...
Now all you need to prove, is that the RF Power Density of a 300
Milliwatt Cellphone, operating one one of 4 Bands in the 800-900
...

Let's say just those figures are correct ...

My Motorola Razar V3 phone is approx. 6mm thick (when opened), and where
the antenna is buried in the phone. This means the antenna can be no
more than 6mm from my head if the phone lies against my head. Now, we
assume the phone is emitting 300mw. This would be equivalent to 1.2w of
power emanating from that same antenna at a distance of 12mm from my
head. And, the latter would be equivalent to 4.8w emanating from the
same antenna at a distance of 24mm from my head. And, the last would be
equivalent to 19.2w emanating from the same antenna at a distance of
48mm from my head ... your higher figure, of two watts, is simply
frightening ...

The lunacy is exposed ... correct any error you see in the above ...

Regards,
JS

I should have clarified "the meaning" in the above ...

Or, to summarize, 300mw sounds both UNGODLY and IRRESPONSIBLE, IMHO ...
I would suspect it to be much nearer 50-100mw ... and I can logic this
by the size of the battery and the time it lasts between charges. (no,
I have NOT taken the time to get the battery specs and do the computations!)

However, doing the math, 50mw is too much. And, an equivalent of 1kw
emanating from the antenna comes at MUCH TOO CLOSE a distance ...

Sorry I had to take two posts to make that clear.

Regards,
JS

John Smith wrote:

...
However, doing the math, 50mw is too much. And, an equivalent of 1kw
emanating from the antenna comes at MUCH TOO CLOSE a distance ...

Sorry I had to take two posts to make that clear.

Regards,
JS

Well, the 3.7v, 900mah li-ion battery lasts ~2hrs of continuous "talk
time", I have verified this ...

It seems 300mw (actual output!) is NOT unimaginable ... :-(

Regards,
JS

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
JB wrote:

...
That's the trouble with you people. You insinuate by "asking a
question" or
making up a meaningless phrase like "noticeable damage" or "common sense
laws" in such a way that it panics the ignorant or non thinking people
into
running over a cliff or voting, then you sit back and feign ignorance.
Just
beware you don't get caught in your own stampede. I submit that power
tools
should be rendered safe before exposing them to people with "artistic
license" or who feel themselves "not responsible" for their actions
because
they are crazy.
...

Yes, I have heard that argument before, with tobacco ... Nicola Tesla
once said chewing gum was more damaging than alcohol ... This URL:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thalidomide

This drug was once thought "safe" and marketed/sold in over 50
countries. It was thought so safe, it was given to pregnant women,
causing innumerable birth defects in children (children born without
hands/arms/feet/legs/etc.

Your argument against caution is simply ignorance such we have seen in
the past ... some of us learned. Even when the BEST AUTHORITIES say is
is "OK", use caution!

We know that the human body can be harmed by just sitting in the sun too
long. How much RF at what frequency has or has not caused damage to
those
who have been or are exposed, has been addressed only by FCC setting an
arbitrary specification without supporting data other than that supplied
by
military microwave studies with respect to high powered radar. Nor do
the
studies support that there is noticable damage by observing the military
safety standard or by the FCC standard that sets limits much lower, and
even
lower still for those who aren't knowlegable on the subject.. So then
it is
anything but an objective issue. I too have been exposed, but limited
my
exposure based on time averaging, so I have encountered field-densities
thousands of times greater than a cell phone for a several minutes and
hundreds of times, for as much as an hour with no discernible effect in
the
long or short term, but have encountered unknown intense fields with
short
term issues, such as headache in the evening after exposure, but gone in
the
morning. I have certainly encountered the same thing more often from
over
exposure to "a day at the beach".

OK, so do an experiment yourself to test the amount of damage!

1) Cut an opening in the door of your microwave.

2) Insert your hand.

3) Turn on the microwave for 5 seconds.

4) Repeat 1 - 3 until "noticeable damage" occurs.

5) Come up with a time you think it is "OK" to microwave your hand;
quite possibly, you may wish to consider a time MUCH LOWER (as a "test
standard", note that zero seconds will ALWAYS be safer) than the time to
do "noticeable damage."

(Disclaimer, the above is only meant as a warning to demonstrate the
ignorance of the previous posters logic -- i.e., IT SHOULD NEVER BE
ATTEMPTED FOR ANY LENGTH OF TIME!) Or, don't do this yourself, EVER!


Case in point: As a nonsmoker, I have problems reworking PC boards
because
my employer has no plausible deniability that any respiratory ailment I
might succumb to in later years wouldn't arguably be caused by a
self-inflicted lifestyle condition rather than an employment hazard.

ABSOLUTELY! OTHER things cause cancer/illness, a search of the internet
will provide you with countless and proven substances/tasks/jobs/etc.
which you should provide. If you think there is a real danger with ANY
job you take--QUIT--IMMEDIATELY! But then, you can't protect some from
themselves, those will die for their occupation/job. :-(


In the face of other more serious health risks such as sunstroke,
falling
off a tower or electrocution, RF exposure is a common sense issue for
hams
and those in the business, and a non-issue for those who will never
enter
restricted areas. In fact, there are far more daily hazardous things
that
we encounter, as to obliterate any test data. Your Petri dish and
sal****er
experiments have less credibility than the anecdotal.

Hey, some will make a trade off and face such serious consequences to
their health and safety in exchange for money -- I only hope their
compensation is justified, at least to them. Again, some people cannot
be saved from themselves ... and then, once they have made such a BAD
decision, they only wish to blame others.

If you are too stupid to protect yourself, am I required to do so? (I
mean I will, but then, I will not let you work at places injurious to
you! I mean, for God sakes man, you will raise insurance premiums
through the roof!)


It's like the illegal alien issue. Due to the lack of proper judgment
and
widespread hysteria, more housekeepers and migrant workers will suffer
than
gangbangers who find prison to be a climate-controlled mailing address
with
a few inconveniences, but "three hots and a cot". Deportation gives
opportunity for those with plenty of drug money to do it again. All the
hysteria does is help to polarize nationalism (and foreign nationalism).

Well, I guess, declines in the American living standards, importation of
3rd world conditions here, lack of medical care for millions, untold
people without home ownership, etc., is nice! -- if you like that sort
of thing ... personally, I would seek other/more-positive solutions.


With the population of foreign nationalist gringo haters in this country
outnumbering those in Mexico, why do we need fences at all? Perhaps for
a
start, we might plant more businesses in Mexico rather than having
everything shipped all the way from China.



Well, we could just give them everything, then hate them for having it
and work for slave wages getting it back and just keeping fed, I guess;
again, some people have different ideas.

Personally brother, I would move away from such conditions -- but that
is just me ...

Regards,
JS

You seem to have a real problem with reading comprehension too.

John Smith wrote:
... (no,
I have NOT taken the time to get the battery specs and do the
computations!)
...
Regards,
JS

I am surprised, the BR60 li-ion battery is 3.7v @ 900mah ... the ~2hr
talk time suggests 300mw is well within reason ... I am surprised the
battery packs that kind of punch. :-(

Regards,
JS

Well, I can't explain anything rationaly to you because you are jumping
wildly to conclusions like a cartoon character. All I'm saying, is that you
need to objectively assess risks. If you can't do that you ought to be
institutionalized for the safety of yourself and others.

The statistics of wireless devices causing harm are so off the radar there
are none! And this is the smoking gun - if there were, they would have
come forward by now from the 2 way and uwave industry with complaints, but I
haven't heard of anyone in the business who HAS been harmed in my 30 years
of experience. And that is 15 years under the old standards of RF
exposure - NONE.

I invite anyone from the industry who reasonably thinks they have been
harmed to respond. Particularly from the retired folks. I'm not talking
about RF burns, as they are minor and pain has a way of causing you to limit
that exposure.

You can eliminate the potential of risk entirely by throwing away all RF
devices.

But don't stop there because of all the risks that you failed to account
for, such as rolling out of bed in the morning or burning yourself making
breakfast or tripping on the front steps or getting in a wreck on the way to
work.

THAT is a major risk statistically, whereas the statistics of RF harm are
unknown because no is so stupid, to cut their arm off or cut a hole in the
uwave oven door AS YOU SUGGESTED just to get a chance to GET harmful
exposure, which sort of proves my point about the general public having to
try real hard in order to to be exposed to harmfull levels of energy.

Getting back to the cell phones and Blackberry's - and I thought that's what
we were talking about - DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT! They really don't amount to
squat! Honest!

BTW I put a mouse in a Litton uwave oven in 1983 for 10 seconds and removed
him because I didn't want to push the little guys luck or see him suffer.
NO noticeable or discernable damage or harm was done and he went on to sire
several healthy normal litters.

John Smith wrote:
John Smith wrote:
... (no, I have NOT taken the time to get the battery specs and do the
computations!)
...
Regards,
JS

I am surprised, the BR60 li-ion battery is 3.7v @ 900mah ... the ~2hr
talk time suggests 300mw is well within reason ... I am surprised the
battery packs that kind of punch. :-(

Regards,
JS

Of course, our "difference" could stem solely from differing definitions
of the word prudent, such as in "prudent man."

I am using this definition:

Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)

Prudent \Pru"dent\, a. [L. prudens, -entis, contr. from
providens: cf. F. prudent. See Provident.]
1. Sagacious in adapting means to ends; circumspect in
action, or in determining any line of conduct; practically
wise; judicious; careful; discreet; sensible; -- opposed
to rash; as, a prudent man; dictated or directed by
prudence or wise forethought; evincing prudence; as,
prudent behavior.

Moses established a grave and prudent law. --Milton.

Regards,
JS

JB wrote:
Well, I can't explain anything rationaly to you because you are jumping
wildly to conclusions like a cartoon character. All I'm saying, is that you
need to objectively assess risks. If you can't do that you ought to be
institutionalized for the safety of yourself and others.

The statistics of wireless devices causing harm are so off the radar there
are none! And this is the smoking gun - if there were, they would have
come forward by now from the 2 way and uwave industry with complaints, but I
haven't heard of anyone in the business who HAS been harmed in my 30 years
of experience. And that is 15 years under the old standards of RF
exposure - NONE.

I invite anyone from the industry who reasonably thinks they have been
harmed to respond. Particularly from the retired folks. I'm not talking
about RF burns, as they are minor and pain has a way of causing you to limit
that exposure.

You can eliminate the potential of risk entirely by throwing away all RF
devices.

But don't stop there because of all the risks that you failed to account
for, such as rolling out of bed in the morning or burning yourself making
breakfast or tripping on the front steps or getting in a wreck on the way to
work.

THAT is a major risk statistically, whereas the statistics of RF harm are
unknown because no is so stupid, to cut their arm off or cut a hole in the
uwave oven door AS YOU SUGGESTED just to get a chance to GET harmful
exposure, which sort of proves my point about the general public having to
try real hard in order to to be exposed to harmfull levels of energy.

Getting back to the cell phones and Blackberry's - and I thought that's what
we were talking about - DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT! They really don't amount to
squat! Honest!

BTW I put a mouse in a Litton uwave oven in 1983 for 10 seconds and removed
him because I didn't want to push the little guys luck or see him suffer.
NO noticeable or discernable damage or harm was done and he went on to sire
several healthy normal litters.



That is a lot, and WAY overly complicated, IMHO ... and no, I don't need
do all that ...

I need only "error on the side of caution." (If only I'd done that with
smoking!) But then, that is keeping with the theme of "prudent
man/men", which was my original statements intent.

Besides, Bluetooth improves the whole "phone experience", hands free
digit dial and name dial are very handy. And, it is a law to be
hands-free on the phone while driving an auto in California ... :-) A
win-win situation which has few equals. Your particular mileage may
vary ...

Regards,
JS

JB wrote:
SNIP

You seem to have a real problem with reading comprehension too.


And you with trimming posts!

--
M0WYM
www.radiowymsey.org

Wymsey - Ten years Old!
www.wymsey.co.uk

You wrote:


Now all you need to prove, is that the RF Power Density of a 300
Milliwatt Cellphone, operating one one of 4 Bands in the 800-900
Mhz, and 1800 - 2000 Mhz, will cause ANY Measurable Heating in
Human Tissue, and therefore cause some sort of problem.

No problem:

http://www.wymsey.co.uk/wymchron/cooking.htm


--
M0WYM
www.radiowymsey.org

Wymsey - Ten years Old!
www.wymsey.co.uk

"M0WYM" wrote in message
...
You wrote:


Now all you need to prove, is that the RF Power Density of a 300
Milliwatt Cellphone, operating one one of 4 Bands in the 800-900
Mhz, and 1800 - 2000 Mhz, will cause ANY Measurable Heating in
Human Tissue, and therefore cause some sort of problem.

No problem:

http://www.wymsey.co.uk/wymchron/cooking.htm

Check out Snopes on that. There are some Fake YouTubes on that too. It
seems you can't even do that with a pile of phones. Nor can you receive
police calls on your cell phone by spreading peanut butter on the SIM card.
But if it is any consolation, I can grab on to a 50 watt 2m antenna and feel
it get warm. Again, I can stand in the sun and get warm too. Aside from
the known UV exposure problem, the tissue heating appears to have little
negative impact over the long run when taken in moderation.

Still, people have been killed in their sleep by electric blankets. And I
would question the sensibility of someone who stands in between two 10db 900
MHz 1kw ERP paging antennas just to get warm. But I've seen that done too.

Studies show that the penetration of RF heating into the body is tied quite
a bit to the wavelength, and that the greatest penetration was somewhere
between 400 and 2000 Mhz. The most worrisome issue was found to be the
human eye at those frequencies. There is no blood flow in the Vitreous
solution in the eyeball to cool it, nor in the Cornea tissue. Nor are you
apt to notice if there is heating of that tissue. One of the long term
results of the Military observations, were cataract formation in those who
worked closely with microwave RADAR energy. You should be more concerned
with the 5 watt 440 or 800 HT with the antenna right in your eye than your
earlobe, which has blood flow.

If you notice your earlobe getting warm, reduce your talk time accordingly.
And don't watch the food cook.