Join for FREE
It only takes a minute!
Zeiss - Always on the lookout for something special – Shop now

Welcome to BirdForum.
BirdForum is the net's largest birding community, dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE! You are most welcome to register for an account, which allows you to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Does EMR harm living organisms?

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 3.50 average.
Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 14:58   #601
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 727
Thanks Kevin; I absolutely agree and this is already happening more and more. Academia is a lot less silo'd now than it was a decade or two ago. Just to give you an example form my own field, I work closely with medics, biologists, analytical and bio-chemists, engineers, bio-informaticians, mathematicians and statisticians - all on the same topic (in this case asthma phenotyping).
But yes there is always room for improvement! It's one of the reasons my university has set up an interdisciplinary degree for 'Natural Sciences', recognising that this is the way forward. Scary...in a good way I hope?!

Joost
__________________
IOC Life list: 1313 (latest: Little Stint @ Lymington & Keyhaven Marshes, Hampshire, UK)

Last edited by Nohatch : Thursday 8th March 2018 at 15:16.
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 17:20   #602
Borjam
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Algorta Spain
Posts: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
@ Borjam It has not been demonstrated that Balmori is utterly clueless, but I think you are.
It's not me who uses a toy "radiation meter", tries to measure the effect of mobile phone radiation on tadpoles in an place receiving strong radio and TV broadcasts and, to add insult to injury, detecting it with a real, serious spectrum analyzer and failing to understand what the "presence of other frequencies" means.

Frequencies are not present. Can't be. Signals or transmissions is the proper word. He also failed to document measurements in proper units.

I sympathise of course, I imagine he didn't want his studies poisoned by RF experts who will surely try to discredit them.

Definitely, it's me who is clueless. My sincere apologies! I better shut up.

Regarding US school shootings and the casualty numbers, clueless so called experts are linking it to the availability of weapons with a high rate of fire. To make things worse, clueless surgeons seem to think that the injuries made by those weapons, for some reason, are even worse than other bullet injuries.
Borjam is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 19:13   #603
CalvinFold
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Borjam View Post
Regarding US school shootings and the casualty numbers, clueless so called experts are linking it to the availability of weapons with a high rate of fire. To make things worse, clueless surgeons seem to think that the injuries made by those weapons, for some reason, are even worse than other bullet injuries.
I must have missed when this got brought-up...and I suggest we all ignore it because this is a side topic that is even more fraught with emotion than Purple Heron's original post...
__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery • Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 2015–2018
CalvinFold is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 19:33   #604
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalvinFold View Post
I must have missed when this got brought-up...and I suggest we all ignore it because this is a side topic that is even more fraught with emotion than Purple Heron's original post...
Purple Heron brought it up (post #582) by suggesting the possibility of a link between EMR and the mass shootings. This being so, Borjam’s response was entirely appropriate in my opinion. The topic is certainly fraught in the more benighted parts of the US but much less so in international venues like BF.
__________________
Bird photos (Flickr): http://www.flickr.com/photos/fugl/
". . .Let them be left, O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet."

--Gerard Manley Hopkins

Last edited by fugl : Thursday 8th March 2018 at 19:40.
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 19:58   #605
jape
Registered User
 
jape's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: warrington
Posts: 739
yeah, kids shooting other kids is not conservation. ruffled feathers forum maybe, it proves nothing and is only vaguely relevant to birds and EMR.
mind you ... someone should be looking into this stuff surely even to disprove it or find out why - or is there no credible evidence or links except through abstract conjecture anywhere? kids shooting kids should raise interest. do any kids without wifi shoot kids, you know Africa, anywhere? do they even have schools there? they do have guns and massacres.

without EMR we would have nothing, maybe a few birds and kids is acceptable? i would rather have the living beings but cannot see any sane way of returning to the past, we have to go on and we will find out the hard way.
jape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 21:43   #606
CalvinFold
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by fugl View Post
Purple Heron brought it up (post #582) by suggesting the possibility of a link between EMR and the mass shootings. This being so, Borjam’s response was entirely appropriate in my opinion. The topic is certainly fraught in the more benighted parts of the US but much less so in international venues like BF.
Fair enough then, I suppose. *shrug*

"Benighted" though...ouch.
__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery • Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 2015–2018
CalvinFold is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 21:53   #607
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalvinFold View Post
"Benighted" though...ouch.
How else would you describe Alabama and Idaho then. . .?
__________________
Bird photos (Flickr): http://www.flickr.com/photos/fugl/
". . .Let them be left, O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet."

--Gerard Manley Hopkins
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 21:57   #608
jape
Registered User
 
jape's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: warrington
Posts: 739
Quote:
Originally Posted by fugl View Post
How else would you describe Alabama and Idaho then. . .?
my american friend once told me Californians are not allowed to have opinions on others, others have opinions about them!
jape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 22:08   #609
CalvinFold
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by jape View Post
my american friend once told me Californians are not allowed to have opinions on others, others have opinions about them!
LOL.

I have a good sense of humor about my state and equal dismay about all states.

As for Alabama and Idaho, I don't think about it too much. That's what states are for...they can solve their own problems. I have enough to deal with in my own state, county, city, neighborhood, townhome complex, and inside my own walls.

I'd have seceded from the planet along time ago (or at least the species), if such a thing was possible or practical.

__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery • Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 2015–2018

Last edited by CalvinFold : Thursday 8th March 2018 at 22:11.
CalvinFold is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 22:39   #610
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 727
Quote:
Originally Posted by fugl View Post
Purple Heron brought it up (post #582) by suggesting the possibility of a link between EMR and the mass shootings. This being so, Borjam’s response was entirely appropriate in my opinion. The topic is certainly fraught in the more benighted parts of the US but much less so in international venues like BF.
Actually, reading the Cherry document is highly relevant to this thread and I highly recommend that everyone does so. It will give you an idea of the kind of pseudo-"science" b.s. we're dealing with here. Honestly, read it. The fact that this drivel is given any kind of credence demonstrates an utter lack of critical thought. Blaming mass shootings on WiFi has literally just blasted the whole topic into tinfoil territory. I personally feel a line has been crossed, but agree that a discussion on the underlying causes for such tragedies is inappropriate here (as others have already pointed out).
Shame, because the original topic is still interesting, but this is just bonkers.

P.S. spelling error corrected!
__________________
IOC Life list: 1313 (latest: Little Stint @ Lymington & Keyhaven Marshes, Hampshire, UK)

Last edited by Nohatch : Thursday 8th March 2018 at 22:45.
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Thursday 8th March 2018, 23:15   #611
jape
Registered User
 
jape's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: warrington
Posts: 739
i have gained a high regard for Purple Heron and have a feeling the concerns have basis. i regard her trying so hard to gain an audience as a genuine desire to articulate what many of us feel, that technology and the consequences are changing our world in an accelerating pace and manner. i also feel that objective scientific method, well structured and appropriately monitored should be used for study in many areas of concern, some control over the market forces and desire for advantage that is so often put forward as a prime reason for lack of commonsense approach to many technologies that affect us and our world. some consolidation and reflection where perhaps impact on culture and moral values have weight. concern for the environment should be a 'given'. but it is not. she is correct in calling for a moratorium but i believe the sometimes antagonism toward and certainly refutation of the studies put forward has clouded the premise or even the possibility of the issue itself.
jape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 9th March 2018, 00:11   #612
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalvinFold View Post
I'd have seceded from the planet along time ago (or at least the species), if such a thing was possible or practical.
Oh, how sad. Has the world really hurt you that much?
__________________
Bird photos (Flickr): http://www.flickr.com/photos/fugl/
". . .Let them be left, O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet."

--Gerard Manley Hopkins
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 9th March 2018, 00:21   #613
CalvinFold
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by jape View Post
i have gained a high regard for Purple Heron and have a feeling the concerns have basis. i regard her trying so hard to gain an audience as a genuine desire to articulate what many of us feel, that technology and the consequences are changing our world in an accelerating pace and manner. i also feel that objective scientific method, well structured and appropriately monitored should be used for study in many areas of concern, some control over the market forces and desire for advantage that is so often put forward as a prime reason for lack of commonsense approach to many technologies that affect us and our world. some consolidation and reflection where perhaps impact on culture and moral values have weight. concern for the environment should be a 'given'. but it is not. she is correct in calling for a moratorium but i believe the sometimes antagonism toward and certainly refutation of the studies put forward has clouded the premise or even the possibility of the issue itself.
This.*

+1
*Tinfoil-hattery aside.
__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery • Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 2015–2018
CalvinFold is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 9th March 2018, 00:24   #614
CalvinFold
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018
 
CalvinFold's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: San Leandro, CA, USA
Posts: 1,567
Quote:
Originally Posted by fugl View Post
Oh, how sad. Has the world really hurt you that much?
I need to get my Spot Bot® out to clean the puddle of sarcasm off the rug...
__________________
Kevin (aka CalvinFold)
My Gallery • Equipment used: 2013 | 2014 | 2015–2018
CalvinFold is online now  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 9th March 2018, 01:18   #615
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,444
Quote:
Originally Posted by CalvinFold View Post
I need to get my Spot Bot® out to clean the puddle of sarcasm off the rug...
Nicely fielded.

Peace. . ..
__________________
Bird photos (Flickr): http://www.flickr.com/photos/fugl/
". . .Let them be left, O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet."

--Gerard Manley Hopkins
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 9th March 2018, 09:03   #616
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 727
Quote:
Originally Posted by jape View Post
i also feel that objective scientific method, well structured and appropriately monitored should be used for study in many areas of concern, some control over the market forces and desire for advantage that is so often put forward as a prime reason for lack of commonsense approach to many technologies that affect us and our world. some consolidation and reflection where perhaps impact on culture and moral values have weight. concern for the environment should be a 'given'. but it is not.
Jape I wholeheartedly agree with you. Once again, there are thousands of scientists around the world working their socks off to do just that. And there are many, many problems. I participated in a land-use impact study in Borneo last year and seeing the devastation caused by plantations there is deeply shocking. Or why don't we have a 600+ post thread on the impact of cotton for our cheap jeans? Or that old chestnut nicknamed global warming? We do have to consider the cultural and environmental impacts of new technologies (moral is a bit more tricky I guess), but it needs to be based on rigorous studies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jape View Post
she is correct in calling for a moratorium
I note that you opted for a very firm statement, so I can only assume you have studied the evidence base and found sufficient reason to support the notion. So could you please summarise your findings so we can discuss them?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jape View Post
but i believe the sometimes antagonism toward and certainly refutation of the studies put forward has clouded the premise or even the possibility of the issue itself.
Please don't conflate the two, the theory/premise can be refuted or accepted (provisionally as always), but it is the discussion itself that's clouded. From my point of view this is because it is not based on clear arguments but on a weird mixture of facts, fiction, feelings and conjecture.
Throwing the late Neil Cherry's document (no way I'm calling that a paper) into the mix is a case in point. Do read it and you'll see what I mean. It is wrong on so many levels, yet happily accepted as a basis for wild speculation about how 5G is going to turn us all into mass murderers. And every other creature on this planet. Except woodpeckers because they breed in holes. And Corvids because they like WiFi. I mean, honestly, what am I to make of that? Do you truly believe that's a sensible suggestion? Do you think it's enough grounds to go to those poor kids in Florida and tell them: hey, if the school hadn't installed free WiFi none of this would have happened!
Somehow I don't think you do. Yet at the same time a document like that is neatly filed with the 'evidence supporting the theory'. I just don't understand....
__________________
IOC Life list: 1313 (latest: Little Stint @ Lymington & Keyhaven Marshes, Hampshire, UK)

Last edited by Nohatch : Friday 9th March 2018 at 09:06.
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 9th March 2018, 11:05   #617
jape
Registered User
 
jape's Avatar

 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: warrington
Posts: 739
simply, evidence or not, there is concern. if baseless, that should be proven. i understand that it would take resources. i regard technology with wonder as much as i do art and nature but the general effects and impacts are documented (cotton jeans you mention, pesticides, fishing, farming) in so many areas of ecology and society enough that i see a need for considered reflection. i think you probably understand me without five more paragraphs. i want mobile radio technology, i want efficient travel. i do not want it to be a huge mistake! let us catch up with health and hospitals, education, consideration of current wars. broad but simple, slow down.

one can mix the values of conservative stability with social response without taking either extreme. one may explore new ideas without the drive to profit. mature reflection and discussion amongst most intelligent people sees this as stability balanced by exploration, it does not have to be so divisive.

Last edited by jape : Friday 9th March 2018 at 11:12.
jape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 9th March 2018, 11:24   #618
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 727
Quote:
Originally Posted by jape View Post
simply, evidence or not, there is concern. if baseless, that should be proven. i understand that it would take resources. i regard technology with wonder as much as i do art and nature but the general effects and impacts are documented (cotton jeans you mention, pesticides, fishing, farming) in so many areas of ecology and society enough that i see a need for considered reflection. i think you probably understand me without five more paragraphs. i want mobile radio technology, i want efficient travel. i do not want it to be a huge mistake! let us catch up with health and hospitals, education, consideration of current wars. broad but simple, slow down.

one can mix the values of conservative stability with social response without taking either extreme. one may explore new ideas without the drive to profit. mature reflection and discussion amongst most intelligent people sees this as stability balanced by exploration, it does not have to be so divisive.
Yes I do understand and I quite agree with those sentiments Jape.
However, my point is that I want to see some solid evidence that there is reason for concern. Why is this statement from the WHO not good enough? Let's focus on solving some real problems, problems that modern technology and all its benefits can actually help us solve!

"Conclusions from scientific research
In the area of biological effects and medical applications of non-ionizing radiation approximately 25,000 articles have been published over the past 30 years. Despite the feeling of some people that more research needs to be done, scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals. Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields.
"
__________________
IOC Life list: 1313 (latest: Little Stint @ Lymington & Keyhaven Marshes, Hampshire, UK)

Last edited by Nohatch : Friday 9th March 2018 at 11:26.
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 9th March 2018, 12:34   #619
Jos Stratford
Beast from the East
 
Jos Stratford's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Exile in Eastern Europe
Posts: 15,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nohatch View Post
Yes I do understand and I quite agree with those sentiments Jape.
However, my point is that I want to see some solid evidence that there is reason for concern. Why is this statement from the WHO not good enough? Let's focus on solving some real problems, problems that modern technology and all its benefits can actually help us solve!

"Conclusions from scientific research
In the area of biological effects and medical applications of non-ionizing radiation approximately 25,000 articles have been published over the past 30 years. Despite the feeling of some people that more research needs to be done, scientific knowledge in this area is now more extensive than for most chemicals. Based on a recent in-depth review of the scientific literature, the WHO concluded that current evidence does not confirm the existence of any health consequences from exposure to low level electromagnetic fields.
"
__________________
For photographs and articles, Lithuania and beyond, click here for my website
Jos Stratford is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Friday 9th March 2018, 13:26   #620
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 412
@ Joost You're right, I could have asked for your CV. And didn't. Mea culpa. I want a day to read the paper you have posted and get back to you on that--in a quick scan of the first couple of pages I saw a couple of points I found interesting. For the record, I am aware that there are problems (more than one kind) with a number of the studies--and these problems often apply just as much to studies that find no effect of EMR. There was that interesting paper Ed posted a while ago showing how changing one small factor could give different results. Also, multidisciplinary work would be a very good idea, and there isn't nearly enough. Dr. Ronald Kostoff, whose letter I posted above, has written some interesting chapters on how EMR may be one of a number of factors that affect outcomes, that factors interact synergistically.

Anyway, I'll come back to that tomorrow. Please remember that the main focus of my argument is not that the science is perfect, but that without a moratorium on 5G there will be no time to find out if the research suggesting EMR is harmful is right. And if it is right, much damage will have been done.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 9th March 2018, 13:58   #621
Nohatch
Mad scientist
 
Nohatch's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Southampton
Posts: 727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
@ Joost You're right, I could have asked for your CV. And didn't. Mea culpa.
No worries, as Fugl likes to say: Peace.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
I want a day to read the paper you have posted and get back to you on that--in a quick scan of the first couple of pages I saw a couple of points I found interesting. For the record, I am aware that there are problems (more than one kind) with a number of the studies--and these problems often apply just as much to studies that find no effect of EMR.
I'll look forward to your reply - and I absolutely agree that all studies should adhere to the same rigorous standards. You'll find that the author criticizes a fair number of "negative" studies as well, including highlighting ones that appear to suffer from 'industry-bias'.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
There was that interesting paper Ed posted a while ago showing how changing one small factor could give different results. Also, multidisciplinary work would be a very good idea, and there isn't nearly enough. Dr. Ronald Kostoff, whose letter I posted above, has written some interesting chapters on how EMR may be one of a number of factors that affect outcomes, that factors interact synergistically.
Again, I fully agree. It may make any effect more difficult to detect, and ultimately we can only get around that by a large number of solid and compatible observations. Disease studies are a lot like that so I'm very familiar with that particular challenge! I should note that this works both ways - there may be all sorts of factors that could 'dampen' the theorised EMF effect(s). I'm thinking in particular about DNA repair mechanisms, free radical scavengers, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
Anyway, I'll come back to that tomorrow. Please remember that the main focus of my argument is not that the science is perfect, but that without a moratorium on 5G there will be no time to find out if the research suggesting EMR is harmful is right. And if it is right, much damage will have been done.
I am really torn on that argument. Whilst I hear your warning, and there have been pretty awful mistakes in the past (CFCs, phosphates in washing powder, nuclear weapons, fossil fuels...), on balance the evidence base for negative effects appears to be so slim as to be negligible (see the WHO statement). I appreciate 5G is new and therefore a bit of an unknown, but is it really that different?
In the end it comes down to an assessment of the potential (not perceived!) risks versus benefits, doesn't it? So far I cannot see any real risk, but lots of benefits (things like smartphone addictions etc. aside). But if a clear and significant risk is demonstrated I'll be the first to change my mind.

Joost

P.S. if you haven't watched them yet I highly recommend the 'Black Mirror' series (currently on Netflix but I'm sure you can get hard copies or downloads somewhere).
__________________
IOC Life list: 1313 (latest: Little Stint @ Lymington & Keyhaven Marshes, Hampshire, UK)
Nohatch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Friday 9th March 2018, 22:00   #622
fugl
Registered User
BF Supporter 2018

 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Reno, Nevada
Posts: 14,444
Vive la France department—

Are iPhones Bad for Kids?
https://nyti.ms/2DbVUfP
__________________
Bird photos (Flickr): http://www.flickr.com/photos/fugl/
". . .Let them be left, O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet."

--Gerard Manley Hopkins
fugl is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 10th March 2018, 11:27   #623
Purple Heron
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 412
Re "Environmental Impacts of RF Fields"

@ Joost, everyone

First of all, I want to dispute that statement from the WHO, which is regarded by many as a "captured agency" much like the FCC, ICNIRP and SCENIHR. In rebuttal, I offer the attached paper by Lennart Hardell, which points out that whatever the WHO may say about non-ionizing radiation levels being safe, WHO headquarters in Geneva keeps them way down. Also, he points out that the IARC , responsible for the classification of RF-EMF as a 2B carcinogen, is independent of the WHO. The Verscheve paper does take the 2B classification into account.

With regard to "Environmental Impacts of RF Fields," I think it's a good paper and I can clearly understand the problems that he cites with various studies. My overall reading of what he is saying is not that he thinks that the authors are necessarily wrong to think that EMR has environmental impacts, but that due to failures in methodology, they have failed to demonstrate it conclusively. In his comments, p.47, he says, "Yet it should also be said that we cannot prove or even provide solid arguments that many of the conclusions reached by the authors are wrong, even if parts of their study (e.g. dosimetry) did show evident errors..."

So yes, there are flaws in the studies he looked at and they do not, for a variety of reasons, constitute concrete proof that EMR affects the environment in the ways the authors say they do. But he does say in his introduction, "Not all of these can be dismissed on the basis of experimental errors, too small sample size, dosimetric uncertainties, and other shortcomings."

Overall, I got the impression that the author, while he would not consider effects of EMR on wildlife to be proven, would not say that EMR does not affect wildlife. He advocates more and better research, and he also advocates some precaution with regard to the ubiquitous and indiscriminate placement of cell towers (p.3) when he says, "Installation and maintenance of base station antennas in such habitats should be subject to restrictions as they may, according to the habitat and particular situation, be responsible for important disturbances of, for example, endangered species."

In short, this paper sounds not dissimilar in some ways to what was discussed at the Eklipse web conference: there are problems with a lot of the research, we don't know nearly enough, we need to do more research and refine protocols, but overall it looks as if EMR is having some effects on nature so we need to know more and we ought to employ some precautions in case it turns out the effects are worse than we can currently prove they are. Hence the calls for keeping cell towers out of wildlife reserves, for the precautionary principle, for a moratorium on 5G.

So, is there one definitive study out there that would, all by itself, halt wireless technologies in their tracks and stop 5G dead? It doesn't seem so, certainly not with regard to nature--although effects on nature have not been the primary concern of most researchers. But there are concerns, and it may be that levels ICNIRP and other bodies say are safe for humans are not safe for wildlife. Has anyone ever tried to calculate the SAR (specific absorption rate) for a beetle or a tomato plant? Plus there are a great many confounders, so it is very hard to separate the EMR factor from other factors (pollution, etc.) and in any case they may well act synergistically--something that has definitely not been adequately researched.

However, new data keeps emerging, and taken all together there does seem to be a basis for questioning assumptions that EMR is safe. There are new studies suggesting that the WHO/IARC classification of EMR as a carcinogen should be revised upward. There is evidence that the phones themselves, when used as people actually use them, generate EMR way in excess of ICNIRP safety levels--i.e., thermal levels. Ever hear of "Phonegate"? Probably not because it didn't make the mainstream media, though it should have. In a nutshell, the French government has been measuring levels of EMR with regard to specific cell/smart phones since 2012, and most of them exceed ICNIRP standards of radiation when used as people use them in real life, so radiation levels are often 3 times higher than allowable limits. Did they ban these products? No. Did they publicize the data? No. A French doctor, Marc Arazi, got that data with some difficulty and publicized it. Here is a link to the "Phonegate" scandal, with links to Arazi's original work: https://ehtrust.org/questions-answer...ase-phonegate/

If the facts about the safety of cell phones is being kept from the public, how about the towers themselves? Are they safe? Are they all operating within the safety parameters allowed by law? In the US, it was found that one tower in ten exceeded those parameters. Who knows what is happening elsewhere? Here is a link to a brand new study titled "Cell Phone Towers are the Largest Contributor to Environmental Radio Frequency Radiation." See http://www.saferemr.com/2018/03/cell...e-largest.html
Radiation levels varies country-to-country. This could easily explain why I see effects on birds that others are not observing. As for the patterns I see concerning which birds are more and less effected by EMR, perhaps one day someone will look into that. I'm not equipped to do so.

In any case, there are problems with the levels set by bodies such as ICNIRP and SCENIHR. One, they do not consider safety levels for nature, and they never have. Two, they consider the effects of EMR alone, and do not consider that EMR may act synergistically with other environmental toxins to produce effects. Three, they do not consider length of exposure. With more and more cell towers, and especially with 5G from space, exposure will be constant and unavoidable.

I realize that I cannot provide 100% convincing proof that EMR is bad for nature, and that it is possible to find flaws in many of the studies finding bad effects. No argument there. So if you need 100% proof before you will consider the issue, or think we should apply the precautionary principle or ask for a moratorium on 5G, I don't think I can supply that. But the precautionary principle does not ask for firm proof. It only asks that there be a reasonable indication that there are bad effects from a phenomenon, process or product. The precautionary principle buys time to study things properly--however long that takes. A moratorium does the same thing--it buys time for research. With that time, you can really "science the hell out of" EMR. Without time and proper research, you can't.

As far as I can tell, the push for 5G and 5G from space is not driven by need, but by greed and fear. Years of zero and negative interest rates and of financial manipulation have left people very scared. They can't think of any way to sell people new stuff and keep the economic wheels turning without 5G, so that's what the rush is all about.

If this were a trial, there would be a verdict. In Scotland, there are three options. There is "guilty", there is "innocent" and there is "not proven". This is not like a murder trial where we look to prove EMR guilty or innocent beyond a reasonable doubt. In Scotland, where you may have a reasonable doubt that falls short of concrete proof either way, you would go for the verdict of "not proven". In Scotland, the accused would not go to prison on a verdict of "not proven" because it is accounted a greater evil to jail a potentially innocent person than to let free a potentially guilty one. With EMR, the situation is different. The greater evil would be to go on promoting a technology that might cause great harm when we might have been wiser to stop and assess the situation properly before proceeding.

If your verdict is "guilty" or "not proven", I would argue that you should add your voice to those demanding the precautionary principle and a moratorium on 5G. If your verdict is that EMR is "innocent" of causing harm to the natural world, do nothing. Wait and see.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf Hardell Int J Oncol 2017_51_405-413.pdf (565.9 KB, 8 views)

Last edited by Purple Heron : Saturday 10th March 2018 at 11:35.
Purple Heron is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old Saturday 10th March 2018, 12:52   #624
Jos Stratford
Beast from the East
 
Jos Stratford's Avatar

 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Exile in Eastern Europe
Posts: 15,926
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple Heron View Post
We encountered some very mad and aggressive dogs in Northern Greece last spring, mostly along the Greek-Turkish border where EMR levels are very high.
I think I encountered very mad and aggressive dogs on every trip I made to Turkey

If of any relevance, I haven't been to Turkey since they developed their cell phone network ...maybe these very same mad dogs are now hyper mad and armed with assault rifles.
__________________
For photographs and articles, Lithuania and beyond, click here for my website
Jos Stratford is offline  
Reply With Quote

BF Supporter 2007 2009 Support BirdForum With A Donation

Old Saturday 10th March 2018, 14:29   #625
Gordon
Registered User

 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 775
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jos Stratford View Post
I think I encountered very mad and aggressive dogs on every trip I made to Turkey

If of any relevance, I haven't been to Turkey since they developed their cell phone network ...maybe these very same mad dogs are now hyper mad and armed with assault rifles.
Gordon is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisement
Reply


Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Google - this site may harm your computer ?? Kits Computers, Birding Software And The Internet 7 Saturday 31st January 2009 18:09
What birds can harm humans scuba0095 Birds & Birding 40 Friday 26th May 2006 19:09
Do feeders do more harm or good? cavan wood Garden Birds, Bird Feeding & Nestboxes 14 Tuesday 17th May 2005 15:19
The Living House, The Living Garden George Ordish Richard D Books, Magazines, Publications, Video & DVD 3 Tuesday 5th October 2004 14:59

{googleads}

Fatbirder's Top 1000 Birding Websites

Help support BirdForum

Page generated in 0.22212291 seconds with 38 queries
All times are GMT. The time now is 13:54.