TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: One in 20 People May Have a Mobile Phone Illness

Re: One in 20 People May Have a Mobile Phone Illness

Robert Bonomi (bonomi@host122.r-bonomi.com)
Tue, 08 Feb 2005 10:14:48 -0000

In article <telecom24.55.1@telecom-digest.org>, Marcus Didius Falco
<falco_marcus_didius@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2091-1463100,00.html

> The Sunday Times - Ireland

> Richard Oakley

> UP TO 5% of the population may be suffering ill health as a result of
> radiation from mobile phones and masts, according to a group of Irish
> doctors fighting for official acceptance of the problem.

> ....... In a study to be released this week, the doctors will say
> they have identified 16 people whom they believe have been adversely
> affected by radiation. .....

> ..... It wants special screens for the 16 people in
> the study, to see if their conditions improve when radiation is
> blocked.

> ...... McCrory blames nearby mobile phone masts for her
> illness and said she can t leave her house because masts are
> everywhere now . I can't sleep, my head pounds, my skin burns and I
> get a painful pumping sensation from head to toe. It has got so bad
> that I feel suicidal, she said.

Oh Lordie, Lordie! That's some of the *FUNNIEST* stuff I've read in
_years_.

Cell-phone base stations, like cell-phones themselves, scale down
their transmit power to the minimum level needed for reliable
communication.

In a *worst*case* scenario -- where the phone has to run at full power
out, the cell tower might be transmitting an entire TEN WATTS.

And, of course, the more cells there are in the area, the *LOWER* the
power output from any transmitter -- because the 'range' to the cell
'edge' (i.e., where some other tower is closer to the phone) is a
smaller distance. Less transmit power is required to make for an
'acceptable' signal level at the 'worst case' point of reception.

In metropolitan areas, the 'radius' of a cell is a few miles, at
*most*.

A "legal power" TV station transmitter will produce similar signal
levels at receivers more than FIFTY MILES away from the
transmitter. (Stations on the "Central Iowa Telefarm", at Alleman,
Iowa -- between Des Moines and Ames, claim an _85_ mile radius for
their "service area". With high-gain receiving antennas, double that
distance is possible.)

If you're within a mile of such a TV transmitter, the signal levels
are some 2500(!!) times higher than the _maximum_ from a cell tower.
If the 85 mile number is to be believed, you can roughly _triple_ that
number (some what over 7200).

It's positively *amazing* that these people are susceptible to
cell-phone tower transmissions, but don't seem to be bothered by TV,
"business two-way", "Police/Fire/Ambulance", taxi-cab, etc., etc.,
that all generate much *HIGHER* signal levels in the atmosphere.
*AT*SIMILAR*FREQUENCIES*.

I've got fifty thousand -- no, make that fifty *million* -- quatloos
that says that you could shut any of those 'victims' of this "illness"
in a large "Faraday Cage", along with a cell-phone transmitter/antenna
(behind a wall where they couldn't see it), and they would be utterly
*unable* to tell if or when that transmitter was operating.

For those who don't know what a Faraday Cage is, it is a totally
shielded enclosure. *NO* RF energy from the 'outside world' will
reach the inside of the enclosure. Nothing from inside it, will get
out, either.

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Tim@Backhome.org: "Re: Digital Cellular Sound Quality"
Go to Previous message: jmeissen@aracnet.com: "Re: Motorola v550 - Picture Downloading??"
May be in reply to: Marcus Didius Falco: "One in 20 People May Have a Mobile Phone Illness"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page