Results 1 to 7 of 7
  1. ike301's Avatar
    Posts
    424 Posts
    Global Posts
    474 Global Posts
       #1  
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060331/sc_nm/phones_dc_3

    so, and in all seriousness, do the bluetooth headsets also give off this theoritical 'tumor' waves?
    Sprint Treo 755p (ex-650) user and loving it.
    1.04-SPNT
  2. #2  
    Quote Originally Posted by ike301
    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060331/sc_nm/phones_dc_3

    so, and in all seriousness, do the bluetooth headsets also give off this theoritical 'tumor' waves?
    Based on how I understand the current theory, no. The majority of RF heat coming from the cell phone is coming off of the antenna. So, again, in theroy, the farther one is away from the cell antenna the less one's risk of cell damage caused by RF energy. Of course BT devices have antennas too but they are much smaller and don't emit the kind of energy a cell phone antenna does.

    Having said this, I'm still pretty skeptical about the whole cell phone-brain tumor link.
  3. ike301's Avatar
    Posts
    424 Posts
    Global Posts
    474 Global Posts
       #3  
    Quote Originally Posted by hoovs
    Based on how I understand the current theory, no. The majority of RF heat coming from the cell phone is coming off of the antenna. So, again, in theroy, the farther one is away from the cell antenna the less one's risk of cell damage caused by RF energy. Of course BT devices have antennas too but they are much smaller and don't emit the kind of energy a cell phone antenna does.

    Having said this, I'm still pretty skeptical about the whole cell phone-brain tumor link.
    i'm totally skeptical too. but at the same time, there are numerous 'radio waves' that are condensed and though maybe not dangerous in one shot, but over time and in totality, one could theorize that it is harmful. i mean, look at x-rays - the power of a single shot can be lethal and supposedly can cause cancer - i hate those lead blankets they use.... (i was just at a dental office.)

    and to be honest, i think i would easily go over 2000 hours in a lifetime, the way i'm on the phone. definitely at least an hour average per day, sometimes more, sometimes less, but on average, maybe 1 hour maybe two. that's already 365 hours a YEAR. hahahaha
    Sprint Treo 755p (ex-650) user and loving it.
    1.04-SPNT
  4. #4  
    This might help:

    In the United States, mobile phones operate in a frequency ranging from about 850 to 1900 megahertz (MHz). In that range, the radiation produced is in the form of non-ionizing radiofrequency (RF) energy. This RF energy is different than the ionizing radiation like that from a medical x-ray, which can present a health risk at certain doses.

    At high enough levels, RF energy, too, can be harmful, because of its ability to heat living tissue to the point of causing biological damage. In a microwave oven, it's RF energy that cooks the food, but the heat generated by cell phones is small in comparison. A mobile phone's main source of RF energy is its antenna, so the closer the antenna is to a phone user's head, the greater the person's expected exposure to RF energy.

    Because RF energy from a cell phone falls off quickly as distance increases between a person and the radiation source, the safety of mobile phones with an antenna mounted away from the user--like on the outside of a car--has not been called into question. Also not in doubt is the safety of those so-called cordless phones that have a base unit attached to a home's telephone wiring and operate at much lower power levels than cell phones.

    Many experts say that no matter how near the cell phone's antenna--even if it's right up against the skull--the six-tenths of a watt of power emitted couldn't possibly affect human health. They're probably right, says John E. Moulder, Ph.D., a cancer researcher and professor of radiation oncology at the Medical College of Wisconsin. It's true, he says, that from the physics standpoint, biological effects from mobile phones are "somewhere between impossible and implausible."

    At the same time, Moulder supports further studies into the science of cell phone radiation. "Some people think the power emitted by the phones is so low, it's a silly thing to research. But I think it remains a legitimate area of study."
    http://www.fda.gov/fdac/features/2000/600_phone.html
    (emphasis mine)
  5. wildfirex's Avatar
    Posts
    52 Posts
    Global Posts
    63 Global Posts
    #5  
    There is a distinct difference between X-Rays (which is a form of ionizing radiation), and EM radiation in the SHF/microwave band (which is what W-CDMA uses), or in the UHF band (GMS, other CDMA, etc.). X-Rays actually are so energetic they knock the electrons off of atoms, destabilizing complex proteins making up the various types of RNA, and of course, cellular DNA. This is what causes our three-armed babies or nice big brain tumors.

    Non-ionizing radiation, such as microwaves, standard RF in the UHF or HF bands, etc. does little more then heat up cells. Microwaves, of course, are more apt to heat up cells than higher wavelength, due to the fact that they are closer to 2.45 GHz (the kind that are in your microwave oven). Wavelengths close to that resonate at the same frequency that water does, and cause water molecules to vibrate, which is the same thing as adding heat energy. The water heats up, meaning the food (or your grey matter, such as it is) heats up.

    The permeability of water is different at different wavelengths, meaning that some frequencies will resonate with water, while others won't. This is also the same reason that different wavelengths work better for long distance transmission of radio waves while others are short-range and highly directional (although in these cases it's not just water vapor affecting the propogation).

    If you use that cell phone at your pocket, and instead use a bluetooth headset, you are cranking quite a bit less juice through your head. A bluetooth headset operates at about 2.5mW, also at about 2.45 GHz, so assuming that you're using the exact frequency as your microwave oven (and you're not, bluetooth changes channels quite rapidly), your brain is absorbing the entire 2.5mW. Assuming an average 8 lb (3.5 kg) brain, you're taking in .00025/3.5 = 7.1 x 10^-5 W/kg, well below the 1.6 W/kg prescribed as an upper bound by the FCC as the human body's SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) by cell phones.

    Let's put it in terms of BTU's (British Thermal Units). If you were taking all of that energy directly (which you're not), you'd be taking in .00025*3.412 = .00085 BTU's per hour. To put this in perspective, assuming you were on your cell phone for 20 hours per week, every week for the next year (52 weeks), this is .887 BTUs. A BTU is the amount of energy required to heat one pound of water by one degree Fahrenheit. You can't even heat one pound of water by a degree, which means you're not doing much to your brain, which is 8 pounds of mostly water.

    Now let's look at the cell phone itself. A GSM phone operating in the 1900 MHz range is allowed a max of 1 Watt of power (and if they can avoid it, a phone won't use that much, since they deplete more battery that way). So, let's ASSuMe...

    All that power is going straight to your noggin'. Your phone is operating for 20 hours per week @ 52 weeks per year. It's operating at max power. Your brain absorbs all of this as heat, just as if it were in the 2.45 GHz range.

    1 Watt * 3.412 * 20 hours * 52 weeks = 3548.48 BTU's. That seems quite a bit more, right? To put this in perspective, this is a little bit more than a horsepower, as heat, going into your noggin'. That's obviously significant, but still not a whole lot, obviously.

    So, lessons? Use a bluetooth headset. Then, you can feel smrt (errr, smart) after doing all the math proving that you won't get a brain tumor.

    Now, I'm off to the doctor's office to find out once and for all why my head is swollen: Tumor? Or ego? I'm taking bets...
  6. ike301's Avatar
    Posts
    424 Posts
    Global Posts
    474 Global Posts
       #6  
    that shut me up pretty quick. good insight.
    Sprint Treo 755p (ex-650) user and loving it.
    1.04-SPNT
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by WildFireX
    There is a distinct difference between X-Rays (which is a form of ionizing radiation), and EM radiation in the SHF/microwave band (which is what W-CDMA uses), or in the UHF band (GMS, other CDMA, etc.). X-Rays actually are so energetic they knock the electrons off of atoms, destabilizing complex proteins making up the various types of RNA, and of course, cellular DNA. This is what causes our three-armed babies or nice big brain tumors.

    Non-ionizing radiation, such as microwaves, standard RF in the UHF or HF bands, etc. does little more then heat up cells. Microwaves, of course, are more apt to heat up cells than higher wavelength, due to the fact that they are closer to 2.45 GHz (the kind that are in your microwave oven). Wavelengths close to that resonate at the same frequency that water does, and cause water molecules to vibrate, which is the same thing as adding heat energy. The water heats up, meaning the food (or your grey matter, such as it is) heats up.

    The permeability of water is different at different wavelengths, meaning that some frequencies will resonate with water, while others won't. This is also the same reason that different wavelengths work better for long distance transmission of radio waves while others are short-range and highly directional (although in these cases it's not just water vapor affecting the propogation).

    If you use that cell phone at your pocket, and instead use a bluetooth headset, you are cranking quite a bit less juice through your head. A bluetooth headset operates at about 2.5mW, also at about 2.45 GHz, so assuming that you're using the exact frequency as your microwave oven (and you're not, bluetooth changes channels quite rapidly), your brain is absorbing the entire 2.5mW. Assuming an average 8 lb (3.5 kg) brain, you're taking in .00025/3.5 = 7.1 x 10^-5 W/kg, well below the 1.6 W/kg prescribed as an upper bound by the FCC as the human body's SAR (Specific Absorption Rate) by cell phones.

    Let's put it in terms of BTU's (British Thermal Units). If you were taking all of that energy directly (which you're not), you'd be taking in .00025*3.412 = .00085 BTU's per hour. To put this in perspective, assuming you were on your cell phone for 20 hours per week, every week for the next year (52 weeks), this is .887 BTUs. A BTU is the amount of energy required to heat one pound of water by one degree Fahrenheit. You can't even heat one pound of water by a degree, which means you're not doing much to your brain, which is 8 pounds of mostly water.

    Now let's look at the cell phone itself. A GSM phone operating in the 1900 MHz range is allowed a max of 1 Watt of power (and if they can avoid it, a phone won't use that much, since they deplete more battery that way). So, let's ASSuMe...

    All that power is going straight to your noggin'. Your phone is operating for 20 hours per week @ 52 weeks per year. It's operating at max power. Your brain absorbs all of this as heat, just as if it were in the 2.45 GHz range.

    1 Watt * 3.412 * 20 hours * 52 weeks = 3548.48 BTU's. That seems quite a bit more, right? To put this in perspective, this is a little bit more than a horsepower, as heat, going into your noggin'. That's obviously significant, but still not a whole lot, obviously.

    So, lessons? Use a bluetooth headset. Then, you can feel smrt (errr, smart) after doing all the math proving that you won't get a brain tumor.

    Now, I'm off to the doctor's office to find out once and for all why my head is swollen: Tumor? Or ego? I'm taking bets...
    Duh....yo....whatever man....I think it's too late, I already sprung a leak....
    Remember, the "P" in PDA stands for personal.
    If it works for you, it is "P"erfect.

Posting Permissions