Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 81 to 87 of 87
  1. iJITSU's Avatar
    Posts
    163 Posts
    Global Posts
    232 Global Posts
    #81  
    I think there is really something to the claim that RF damages cells and causes cancer. Recently, an individual who spent roughly 5 hours a day talking on a cell phone began displaying strange and violent behavior that doctors now associate with a tumor lodged in his brain. Hard facts are not in, but doctors feel that the tumor was caused by RF. The individuals hair began falling out, then the temper came. Before anyone really knew what was going on, he had attacked a Japanese tourist and beat him about the face. By 2010, I believe we'll all be raving lunatics trashing cities and laying the world to waste. Damn RF. Damn cell phones.
    Attached Images Attached Images
    Last edited by iJITSU; 01/27/2004 at 09:29 AM.
  2. #82  
    Originally posted by bfitzpat
    Just something to think about... I'm not saying the treo can or cannot cause problems to your health - however, the fact of the matter is that antennas do cause health damage - how much depends on the exact frequency and power...
    "fact of the matter" ???
    What facts???

    There are no facts that show antennas cause health damage.

    At least not those antennas found in the public sector on consumer devices.

    And not unless the antenna in question is used as a club.

    There are studies that say antennas may cause health related issues. But even these studies have margins of error greater than the perported increases in risk.
  3. #83  
    Originally posted by iJITSU
    I think there is really something to the claim that RF damages cells and causes cancer. Recently, an individual who spent roughly 5 hours a day talking on a cell phone began displaying strange and violent behavior that doctors now associate with a tumor lodged in his brain. Hard facts are not in, but doctors feel that the tumor was caused by RF. The individuals hair began falling out, then the temper came. Before anyone really knew what was going on, he had attacked a Japanese tourist and beat him about the face. By 2010, I believe we'll all be raving lunatics trashing cities and laying the world to waste. Damn RF. Damn cell phones.
    Had me going there until I opened the image

  4. #84  
    On the front pocket issue: Is the Treo really transmitting that much when it's just turned on and connected, but not actively engaged in a call or Web session? I would be shocked if it were. So I don't think it matters where you keep the Treo. If you're worried about radiation, make shorter calls or use a landline.
  5. #85  
    Originally posted by bfitzpat
    Just one more thing to consider.. Remember, the FCC is the government agency that regulates the majority of these issues, concerns and complaints... the same agency that allocates frequencies and gets paid by these large corporations millions of dollars for licenses to use these frequencies... at what point do they say that the frequency or power level that a phone uses becomes harmless and that they won't sell or accept money (millions of dollars) from a company to use that frequency/power level?
    How can the FCC get paid by large corporations for frequencies??????? Who is paid per say??? Is the chairman of the FCC given a bribe while the rest of the agency looks away in unison? Maybe every employee is given a little bonus to allow this corporation to hold rights on a specific frequency.


    Gimmie a break here! This sounds like usual government paranoia. No government is perfect, few entities are flawless. But to discredit everything you hear from the government because of an isolated instance or so is ludicris. You might as well put your head under a rock, I hear rocks have a flawless record.


    And btw, I'm also not implying to believe everything you hear. But to discredit something out of reputation and not fact is irrational. If you feel the government is wrong, prove them wrong, but to simply say they are wrong because 'they are the government' is specious reasoning... if even that.
  6.    #86  
    I'm fairly certain the FCC has not documented some of the reports or that they at least support the fact that studies are inconclusive so that they can sit back and collect millions.
    Yeah, right. Thanks for that conspiracy theory input.
  7. #87  
    Originally posted by bfitzpat
    Just something to think about... I'm not saying the treo can or cannot cause problems to your health - however, the fact of the matter is that antennas do cause health damage - how much depends on the exact frequency and power...

    I'm not too concerned about the treo affecting my health (although maybe I should be? - paranoid?)... What I am concerned about is that there is in fact - a known level of radiation that will cause harm - and I've never seen a warning label on any phone which identified that level. Whether or not the chances of the radiation from the treo are a fraction of what is needed to cause damage - that fraction still translates to a percentage of people that will have problems.
    WHERE are your facts? Plenty of posts in this thread have gone about showing that there are NO facts saying that cell phone antennas are at all dangerous. There is no "known level of radiation that can cause harm" for cell phones - RF simply doesn't have the power to cause the problems normally associated with the word "radiation."

    Note that this does not mean that cell phone antennas aren't dangerous. It's just that there is no evidence recognized as solid saying that they are. If you go about your life assuming that anything can give you cancer, you won't have much of a life.
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Posting Permissions