View Single Post
      08-14-2011, 09:20 PM   #14
1speedbike
Colonel
1speedbike's Avatar
143
Rep
2,938
Posts

Drives: 2008 BMW 135i
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: NJ, NYC, Baltimore

iTrader: (15)

Quote:
According to the World Health Organization:

Considering the very low exposure levels and research results collected to date, there is no convincing scientific evidence that the weak RF signals from base stations and wireless networks cause adverse health effects.

In commenting on cell phone towers near homes or schools, the Federal Communications Commission states:

Radiofrequency emissions from antennas used for cellular and PCS [personal communications service] transmissions result in exposure levels on the ground that are typically thousands of times below safety limits. These safety limits were adopted by the FCC based on the recommendations of expert organizations and endorsed by agencies of the Federal Government responsible for health and safety. Therefore, there is no reason to believe that such towers could constitute a potential health hazard to nearby residents or students.
Also.. if you're willing to listen to science, here's my take on it..

The increase in cancer risk comes from a lot of various factors about the radiation itself.

Of all the types of waves which could be damaging your DNA, the radiation from cell towers is at the bottom of the list. If you think of radiation as particles travelling in a sinusoidal pattern (waves), then you can see what I mean. In order to do some serious damage to your DNA, the particles not only need to be travelling fast, but they need to have some serious momentum. In order to have momentum, they need to have sizeable mass.

Alpha radiation is particularly nasty because you have relatively huge alpha particles (which are equivalent to a helium nucleus) battering your cells, ripping through, and taking out chunks of DNA. This is why different types of radiation get assigned RBE values, for which alpha particles are assigned a huge value of 12. RBE stands for relative biological effectiveness, and is a way to gauge how "bad for you" different types of radiation are. However, because of the extraordinarily slow velocity (relative to other waves), this type of radiation does not travel well, and even in air won't get far and won't get deep into your skin. It won't even get through a sheet of aluminum foil.. but damn that foil must be hurtin'

EMF waves (visible light, radio waves, UV, X-rays, gamma rays) on the other hand are made up of photons (particles of light). I'm pretty sure we can't actually calculate a photon's mass (if it has ANY) because it's so tiny, though we know they have momentum. With such a small mass, the momentum of the photon is much smaller than that of an alpha particle, and thus has the smallest RBE value of 1. However, due to their high velocity, they DO travel far and can penetrate the walls of your house.

All isn't lost, however, because typical radio waves have a frequency (and thus energy levels) much lower than those of nasty x-rays and gamma rays. The energy of a photon is directly related to its frequency, and lower energy means lower velocity. Without this energy, they simply don't have the momentum to knock your DNA around.

If you notice:



Radio and cell waves are on the OTHER SIDE OF THE SPECTRUM from UV, x, and gamma rays (the ones we always hear about giving cancer). In fact, visible light is MORE damaging than radio waves based on frequency and energy alone.

Instead of basing your information on population studies which only report on correlations, just think about what CAUSES damage to your DNA (elevating the risk for cancer) and how radio waves fit into the equation.

Radio waves simply don't have the energy required to give you cancer. You can rest easy
__________________

Year 1 of the 1