TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Do Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile

Re: Do Allow Under-9s to Use a Mobile

Linc Madison (
Mon, 31 Jan 2005 03:47:58 -0800

> In article <>,
> <> wrote:

>> Hmmm, ... are you saying that the negative effects of exposure to
>> radioactivity is due to heat damage? Somehow I don't think so ...

For the record, I said absolutely no such thing.

I said that any damage to human cells FROM A CELLPHONE would be due to
heating, because the other ways that radiation can damage tissue don't
apply to cellphone wavelengths.

In article <>, <>

> OK, enough already! I'm not stupid enough to think that cell phones
> are radioactive. And I know that RF is not the same as particle
> radiation.

> Linc seemed to be implying that the only possible damage to cells
> had to be from the heat induced by the radiation. I was simply
> pointing out that there are other ways to damage cellular structure
> that don't involve heat, with the point being that while yes, it
> is probably virtually impossible for the electromagnetic radiation
> from a cell phone to induce enough temperature change to have any
> possible effect, there may be other mechanisms that haven't been
> discovered yet.

In other words, cellphones might somehow be dangerous because of some
entirely new physics that hasn't been conceived of yet.

Name ANYTHING ON EARTH about which the same statement can't be made.

> The one thing that I have noticed to be extraordinarily consistent
> throughout the history of science is that whenever one or all of the
> experts think they know everything about something, they don't.

All I'm saying is that there is already substantial evidence that
cellphones are quite safe, and none whatsoever that they aren't. It is
thus silly to say that "we really don't know."

Nothing in science, or especially in medicine, is ever absolutely
100.000% certain. Was Joe's lung cancer caused by the thousands of
cigarettes he smoked, or was it from the benzene he was exposed to when
he was a toddler? Prove it.

There are a few things that can be said with certainty about cellphones.

1. Cellphones produce zero ionizing radiation.

2. Cellphones produce absolutely negligible heat from RF radiation. You
can wrap your fingers (which are quite sensitive to temperature change)
around the antenna of your cellphone, thereby trapping all of that RF
radiation at very close range, and talk for an hour, and you won't feel
a thing, except maybe a cramp in your fingers from clamping onto the
antenna for so long.

3. Cellphones produce very weak EM fields.

4. Using a hands-free kit places the source of the RF and EM fields
farther from your brain, thus reducing the non-existent danger to

5. Placing a plastic sticker on the inside of your cellphone battery
does nothing except waste $19.95 and encourage the proliferation of
annoyingly fraudulent infomercials.

6. There are literally THOUSANDS of things in your daily life that are
demonstrably more dangerous to you than your cellphone could ever be.

Nothing in life is absolutely zero risk. However, some things --
cellphone radiation among them -- are such a small risk that they are
worth absolutely zero expenditure of thought, effort, or worry in your
daily life. Sure, research to confirm their safety should continue --
who knows, maybe holding a NiMH battery next to your ear causes acne --
but it's ridiculous to say "we don't know if they're safe."

This thread has droned on and on, a dog chasing the same dead horse if
you will, but the facts remain the same: cellphones are safe, and no
one has presented anything but empty speculation that some future data
might contradict all the data we have so far and show some hidden risk.
Yeah, and maybe the Vogon fleet is on its way to Arthur Dent's house as
we speak.[*]

[*] Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Linc Madison * San Francisco, California *
<> * primary e-mail: Telecom at LincMad dot com
All U.S. and California anti-spam laws apply, incl. CA BPC 17538.45(c)
This text constitutes actual notice as required in BPC 17538.45(f)(3).

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Rich Greenberg: "Re: Who Does DA For Cox Communications?"
Go to Previous message: -mhd: "Re: Safeway Shopper Card Leads to Arson Arrest"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page